enquiry_describeRead first. States plainly what submit_enquiry does on Cheap 409A: it starts an enquiry with human providers who quote directly. Nothing is bought, ordered or paid; no quote is guaranteed; it is free. Also returns who receives the details, the consent wording, and how the person confirms.
| 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 disclosure burden. It clearly states this is an informational description, that no purchase or payment occurs, and that the tool returns details about recipients, consent wording, and confirmation. It does not explicitly say 'read-only', but the content strongly implies it.
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 about 50 words, opens with a clear directive, and every sentence adds either scope, caveats, or return content. The title also front-loads the core contract in a memorable way.
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 zero-parameter informational tool with no output schema, the description fully covers purpose, what the associated submit_enquiry does, and what the tool returns. Nothing essential for an agent to call it correctly is missing.
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 schema has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description reinforces the no-input nature with 'Read first' and there is no parameter detail to compensate for because none exist.
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 names the exact verb and resource: it 'States plainly what submit_enquiry does on Cheap 409A' and enumerates the content it returns. This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling submit_enquiry by describing the action rather than performing it.
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 imperative 'Read first' explicitly tells the agent to use this tool before submit_enquiry, and the caveats about nothing being bought or guaranteed prevent misuse. It does not explicitly contrast with other siblings like enquiry_fields or compare_options, but the primary alternative is addressed.
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.
The compare_* tools are clearly separated: criteria defines the axes, options lists the entities, and table joins them into the full matrix. The enquiry_* tools are equally distinct: describe explains the process, fields defines the schema, and submit_enquiry executes the two-step submission.
The compare_* tools follow a consistent prefix convention, and enquiry_describe/enquiry_fields follow the same noun-first pattern. submit_enquiry breaks that pattern by leading with a verb instead of the enquiry_ prefix, though it remains clear and predictable.
Six tools is well-scoped for this server's purpose: three tools cover the comparison matrix and three cover the enquiry workflow. Each tool earns its place without redundancy or bloat.
The comparison surface is complete: an agent can discover criteria, filter options, and view the full evaluation table. The enquiry workflow is also complete, covering explanation, schema discovery, validation, consent, and confirmation-token submission.