Skip to main content
Glama

site

by com.californiahvacreplacementcost

Submit an ENQUIRY to human providers (two steps; not a purchase)

submit_enquiry

Submits an enquiry to California HVAC Replacement Cost — NOT a purchase, NOT a guaranteed quote. Step 1: call with the answers (keyed by field key from enquiry_fields) and consent=true; it validates and returns a summary, the consent line and a confirmation token — show the person the summary and the consent line. Step 2: only if the person agrees, call again with the same answers, consent=true and the confirmation token; the enquiry is then submitted, and the person receives an email with a link they must click before any provider sees it. Consent means the person has read and agreed to: "Happy for my details to go to licensed local HVAC contractors, who'll quote me directly."

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
answersYesthe person's answers, keyed by field key
consentYestrue only when the person has agreed to: Happy for my details to go to licensed local HVAC contractors, who'll quote me directly.
confirmationNothe confirmation token from step 1, after the person has approved the summary

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does so thoroughly: it discloses that this is not a purchase/quote, that step 1 only validates and returns a token, that step 2 actually submits, and that the enquiry is only visible to providers after the person clicks an emailed link. It also names the exact consent text.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is long but earns its length: each sentence carries operational information, and the numbered step 1/step 2 structure makes the multi-step behavior easy to follow. Front-loading the 'not a purchase' caveat is effective.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given a two-step tool with no output schema, the description fully specifies inputs, expected step 1 return values (summary, consent line, token), the condition for step 2, and downstream email behavior. It even points to enquiry_fields for answer keys, making the overall context complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema already documents all parameters (100% coverage), and the description adds crucial contextual meaning: 'answers' are keyed by fields from enquiry_fields, 'consent' has an exact quoted meaning, and 'confirmation' is the token produced by step 1. This goes beyond the schema, though a small amount is redundant with schema descriptions.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb ('submits an enquiry') and a concrete target ('California HVAC Replacement Cost'), and explicitly disambiguates what it is not ('NOT a purchase, NOT a guaranteed quote'). The title and description together make it easy to distinguish from the sibling enquiry_* tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Describes a precise two-step invocation protocol: step 1 with answers and consent to obtain a token, step 2 only after the person approves, with the token. It also gives the exact consent condition and notes that a follow-up click is required, leaving no ambiguity about when each call is appropriate.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All site toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

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.

Naming Consistency4/5

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.

Tool Count5/5

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.

Completeness5/5

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.

Resources