enquiry_describeRead first. States plainly what submit_enquiry does on HVAC Software Picker: 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 full behavioral burden, and it does so thoroughly. It discloses that the underlying action starts an enquiry, that nothing is purchased or paid, that no quote is guaranteed, that it is free, and what information is returned.
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 compact, front-loaded with the most important instruction ('Read first'), and every sentence adds value. It avoids redundancy and clearly organizes the key facts about cost, commitment, and return content.
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?
The tool has no parameters and no output schema, so the description must explain both behavior and return value. It does: it explains what the tool communicates, what is not true about the enquiry, and what additional information is returned. There are no significant gaps for an agent to call it correctly.
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, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameters, and the empty schema already fully covers the input surface.
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 states a clear, specific purpose: it explains what submit_enquiry does, and differentiates itself from the actual submission action by being a 'read first' informational tool. It also names the exact scope (HVAC Software Picker) and the key outcome (starting an enquiry with human providers).
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 phrase 'Read first' gives an explicit usage directive: consult this tool before using submit_enquiry. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives or state when not to use it, but the context is clear enough that an agent would know to call this before taking action.
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 clearly distinct role: the three compare_* tools separate criteria, options, and the full matrix, while the three enquiry_* tools separate process explanation, field schema, and submission. There is no meaningful overlap or risk of selecting the wrong tool for a task.
Naming is not fully consistent: compare_criteria, compare_options, and compare_table all follow a verb_noun pattern, but enquiry_describe and enquiry_fields reverse the order or use noun phrases, while submit_enquiry returns to verb_noun. The conventions are readable but mixed across the two functional groups.
Six tools is a well-scoped count for the server's purpose: three tools cover the comparison data surface and three cover the enquiry workflow. Each tool earns its place without redundancy or bloat.
The tool set fully covers the site's apparent domain: retrieving comparison criteria, options, and the full comparison table, plus understanding and submitting an enquiry with a documented two-step consent flow. No obvious dead ends or missing operations are apparent for the stated purpose.