enquiry_fieldsEvery field of the Compare Trade Software 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 provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It details the kind of data returned and the accepted option values, and it implies a safe read-only metadata operation. It does not explicitly state the response format or possible absence of optional fields, but it gives enough behavioral context.
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, front-loaded with the tool's core purpose and then immediately providing actionable guidance about how to use its output. Every sentence earns its place, with no fluff or repetition.
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 no-parameter, no-output-schema tool, this description is complete: it enumerates the output fields, notes variability for allowed options, and connects the result to the submission workflow. An agent can correctly invoke this tool and understand how to use the returned data.
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 an empty schema, so the baseline is 4. The description adds useful semantics by explaining that field keys are the expected keys for submit_enquiry, but there are no input parameters to elaborate on.
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 enumerates every field of the Compare Trade Software enquiry, including key, label, type, required flag, help text, and allowed options. This is specific and differentiates it from sibling tools like submit_enquiry and compare_options, which serve different purposes.
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 provides clear usage context: it points to submit_enquiry and tells the agent to pass answers keyed by the field keys from this tool. It does not explicitly list when-not-to-use scenarios or all sibling alternatives, but the primary workflow is well implied.
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 three compare_* tools are clearly separated by data role: criteria, options, and the full table. The enquiry_*/submit_enquiry tools similarly split schema/context/action with no overlapping purposes.
All names are snake_case and readable, but the compare_* group uses verb-first names while enquiry_describe and enquiry_fields step outside that pattern. submit_enquiry matches the verb-first style, so the inconsistency is minor.
Six tools is well-scoped: three cover the comparison data surface and three cover the enquiry workflow. No tool feels redundant and the count suits a focused niche comparison site.
The surface covers the full user journey: browse comparison criteria/options/table, inspect the enquiry form, and submit with explicit two-step consent. There are no obvious dead ends or missing core operations for this domain.