Skip to main content
Glama

site

by com.hvacsoftwarepicker

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

submit_enquiry

Submits an enquiry to HVAC Software Picker — 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 HVAC software vendors, 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 HVAC software vendors, 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

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It thoroughly explains the two-step submission flow, validation and consent requirements, the confirmation token mechanism, the email link click prerequisite, and the consent text. This gives an agent a complete, accurate model of the tool's side effects.

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 dense but well-structured, with steps explicitly labeled and every sentence contributing essential information (non-purchase disclaimer, consent text, email link requirement). It front-loads the core action and immediately clarifies what the tool is not.

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 complex two-step tool with no output schema, the description is remarkably complete: it explains what each step returns, what the agent must show to the user, when to proceed, and the final email workflow. No critical information needed to invoke the tool correctly is missing.

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 schema coverage is 100%, the description meaningfully enriches parameter understanding: answers are keyed from enquiry_fields, consent is the exact consent line, and confirmation is the step-1 token that unlocks step-2 submission. This cross-parameter flow information is absent from the schema.

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 action ('Submits an enquiry'), the target resource ('HVAC Software Picker'), and explicitly distinguishes it from a purchase or guaranteed quote. It also clearly describes the two-step process, making the tool's purpose unmistakable even among sibling comparison tools.

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?

The description provides clear operational guidance: when to call step 1, when to proceed to step 2, and the consent precondition. It explicitly excludes purchases and guaranteed quotes, but it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when to use sibling tools like enquiry_describe or enquiry_fields.

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

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

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 Consistency3/5

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.

Tool Count5/5

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.

Completeness5/5

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.

Resources