enquiry_describeRead first. States plainly what submit_enquiry does on Mail Merge PDF: 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 burden and does so well: it discloses that nothing is bought, ordered, or paid, that no quote is guaranteed, that it is free, and exactly what the call returns—recipients, consent wording, and confirmation method. This gives an agent clear behavioral expectations beyond the tool name.
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 short, front-loaded with 'Read first' and the core purpose, and every clause adds either scope, disclaimers, or return contents. There is no filler, schema repetition, or unnecessary detail.
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-input, no-output-schema explainer, the description is complete: it says what the tool does, what it is not, and what its response contains. An agent can confidently decide when to call it and what to expect.
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 schema has zero parameters, so there is no parameter documentation burden; the baseline for a zero-parameter tool is 4. The description adds no parameter meaning, but none is needed.
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 specific verb ('States plainly') and resource ('what submit_enquiry does on Mail Merge PDF'), making it clear this is an explanatory tool rather than the submit action itself. It differentiates itself from the sibling submit_enquiry by pointing to that action as its subject, and the title reinforces the scope.
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?
'Read first' is a direct usage cue to invoke this tool before submitting an enquiry, and the description frames it as the plain-language explainer preceding submit_enquiry. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, so it stops short of full routing guidance.
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.
The six tools split cleanly into two distinct groups: the checker (start, answer, tree) for a decision guide and the enquiry (describe, fields, submit) for submitting an enquiry. Within each group, each tool has a clear, unique purpose with no overlapping functionality.
All names use snake_case and are mostly prefixed by their domain (checker_ or enquiry_). The only minor inconsistency is 'submit_enquiry' which puts the action first instead of the domain prefix, but it remains readable and predictable.
With 6 tools, the server is well-scoped for its purpose: three tools cover the decision guide lifecycle and three cover the enquiry submission process. Each tool earns its place, and the count is within the ideal 3-15 range.
The checker covers the full flow: start, step through answers, and view the entire tree. The enquiry covers all necessary steps: understand what it does, get field definitions, and submit with confirmation. There are no obvious missing operations or dead ends.