Skip to main content
Glama

site

by com.expatriationtaxcalculator

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

submit_enquiry

Submits an enquiry to Expatriation Tax Calculator — 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 a relevant cross-border tax adviser, who'll contact 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 a relevant cross-border tax adviser, who'll contact 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

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations available, the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It clearly reveals the two-step validation/submission behavior, the requirement for consent, the email link that must be clicked before any provider sees the enquiry, and the lack of a guaranteed quote.

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 front-loaded with the key distinction ('NOT a purchase, NOT a guaranteed quote') and then organized into clear step 1/step 2 paragraphs. It is detailed because the workflow is genuinely two-step, and no sentence is wasted.

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?

For a tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains what the first call returns (summary, consent line, confirmation token) and what the second call accomplishes (submission plus email with a click-through link). Combined with the step-by-step workflow and consent text, this is complete enough for correct invocation.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Although the schema already documents all three parameters, the description adds crucial usage context: answers are keyed by field keys from enquiry_fields, consent must be the exact quoted text, and confirmation is the token from step 1 used with the same answers on the second call. This is substantive meaning beyond the schema property names.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: it 'submits an enquiry' to a human-provider service for the Expatriation Tax Calculator, and explicitly contrasts this with a purchase and a guaranteed quote. This distinguishes it clearly from sibling tools like calculate and the describe/fields tools even without naming them.

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?

The description gives explicit step-by-step usage: call once with answers and consent=true to get a token, show the summary and consent line, then call again with the same answers plus the token only if the person agrees. It also states what this tool is not for ('NOT a purchase') and that an email link is required before providers see the enquiry.

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

A4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

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.

Naming Consistency3/5

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.

Tool Count5/5

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.

Completeness5/5

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.

Resources