enquiry_fieldsEvery field of the California HVAC Replacement Cost enquiry: key, label, type, whether required, help text and the allowed options where there are any. Pass answers to submit_enquiry keyed by field key.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It accurately describes the returned data and implies a read-only metadata lookup, but it does not explicitly state that the tool has no side effects, requires no authentication, or returns a flat list/object.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is two sentences with no wasted words. The field content list is dense and informative, and the cross-reference to submit_enquiry is directly actionable.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple no-parameter metadata tool, the description is largely complete: it names the resource, lists the returned attributes, and explains how to use the result. It is slightly incomplete in not mentioning the sibling enquiry_describe or the expected response format, but the core calling context is covered.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so there is no parameter ambiguity. Per the baseline for zero-parameter tools, this is appropriate; the description adds the useful context that field keys are the link to submit_enquiry.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool returns every field of the California HVAC Replacement Cost enquiry, enumerating the exact attributes (key, label, type, required, help text, allowed options). This is specific and actionable, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling enquiry_describe.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description gives clear usage context by telling the agent to pass answers to submit_enquiry keyed by field key. However, it does not specify when to use this tool instead of enquiry_describe, so the selection guidance is incomplete.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct role: enquiry_describe explains the process, enquiry_fields provides the schema, and submit_enquiry performs the actual submission. There is no functional overlap or ambiguity between them.
The naming pattern is mostly consistent since all tools include 'enquiry' and use lowercase snake_case, but submit_enquiry reverses the verb_noun order compared to enquiry_describe and enquiry_fields. This is a minor deviation and does not cause confusion.
Three tools is well-scoped for a single enquiry submission workflow: one for overview, one for field definitions, and one for the action itself. Each tool earns its place and there is no bloat or redundancy.
The tool surface fully covers the stated purpose: understanding the enquiry, retrieving the required fields, and submitting with the two-step consent confirmation. No obvious missing operations are needed for the described workflow.