enquiry_fieldsEvery field of the Expatriation Tax Calculator 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 behavioral disclosure burden. It does a good job by specifying exactly what data is exposed and the expected relationship with submit_enquiry. It does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, but for a zero-parameter metadata listing this is a minor omission rather than a significant transparency gap.
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 a single sentence that front-loads the core purpose, enumerates the included attributes, and ends with an actionable pointer to submit_enquiry. Every clause earns its place with no filler.
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, no-output-schema tool, the description gives a solid picture of what the agent receives and how to apply it. It lacks an explicit statement of the output structure (e.g., array of objects), but the enumeration of field attributes sufficiently conveys the shape of the data for most use cases.
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 no parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds relevant context by explaining that the returned field keys are meaningful for submit_enquiry, even though there are no input parameters to document.
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 identifies the resource—the field definitions of the Expatriation Tax Calculator enquiry—and enumerates the exact attributes exposed (key, label, type, required, help text, options). It is distinguishable from siblings like calculator_describe and enquiry_describe, though it stops short of using an explicit verb such as 'returns' or 'lists'.
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 a clear downstream usage instruction: 'Pass answers to submit_enquiry keyed by field key.' This implies when the tool is useful, but it does not explicitly contrast it with sibling tools like enquiry_describe or calculator_describe, nor does it state when not to use it.
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 distinct role: calculate performs the tax computation, calculator_describe and enquiry_describe explain the respective flows, enquiry_fields provides the input schema, and submit_enquiry is the only mutating action. No two tools appear to overlap in purpose.
Names are readable and lowercase but mix verb-first conventions (calculate, submit_enquiry) with noun-first descriptors (calculator_describe, enquiry_describe, enquiry_fields). The 'describe' and 'fields' suffixes are internally consistent, but there is no uniform verb_noun pattern across the set.
Five tools is well-scoped for a focused site offering an exit-tax calculator and an enquiry submission flow. Each tool serves a clear purpose, and the count feels neither sparse nor bloated.
The calculator side is complete with calculate plus full documentation of inputs, outputs, and assumptions. The enquiry side covers schema discovery, process explanation, and two-step submission, leaving no obvious dead-end for the stated purpose.