Skip to main content
Glama

site

by com.hostingbystack

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

submit_enquiry

Submits an enquiry to HostingByStack — 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: "By submitting you agree HostingByStack emails you a recommendation and shares nothing else with anyone."

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
answersYesthe person's answers, keyed by field key
consentYestrue only when the person has agreed to: By submitting you agree HostingByStack emails you a recommendation and shares nothing else with anyone.
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

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so thoroughly: it discloses validation, the summary/consent line/token returned in step 1, the side effect of step 2 (submission plus an email with a click-before-seen link), and the exact consent wording. This goes well beyond the schema.

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?

Although long, the description is dense and purposeful. It front-loads the core action and caveat, then organizes the two steps explicitly. The quoted consent text is necessary and not padding.

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 two-step side-effectful tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers what the agent needs: when to call, what each call returns, what triggers submission, and the consent requirement. It is complete enough to invoke correctly.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful dynamic context: answers must be keyed by field key from enquiry_fields, the same answers must be reused in both calls, and confirmation must be the token obtained after the person approves the summary.

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 names the exact verb and resource ('submits an enquiry to HostingByStack'), explicitly says what it is NOT ('NOT a purchase, NOT a guaranteed quote'), and references enquiry_fields, separating it from siblings like enquiry_describe and enquiry_fields.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It provides a clear two-step usage protocol: call once to validate and get a token, then call again only after the person agrees. It also includes a firm when-not signal by stating this is not a purchase or guaranteed quote. However, it does not name a specific alternative tool for purchases, so it stops short of a full when/alternatives guide.

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

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

The dataset_* tools are mostly distinct, but dataset_row and dataset_compare overlap: both retrieve rows by matching a column value, and compare can effectively do row's job with a single value. The enquiry_* tools are clearly separated by behavior, fields, and submission.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names consistently use lowercase snake_case with clear domain prefixes: dataset_* and enquiry_*. However, some names are nouns (dataset_columns, dataset_row, dataset_stats) while others are verbs or adjectives (dataset_compare, dataset_search, dataset_top), so the pattern is not perfectly uniform.

Tool Count5/5

Ten tools is well-scoped for a server covering two clear areas: read-only dataset exploration and enquiry submission. Each tool has a practical role, and the count is comfortably within the ideal range.

Completeness4/5

The dataset side covers schema, provenance, exact lookup, substring search, comparisons, statistics, and top/bottom rows, which is strong for a read-only dataset server. The enquiry side covers describing the process, listing fields, and submitting with a two-step confirmation, though there is no way to check submission status or cancel an enquiry.

Resources