Skip to main content
Glama

SDUK Studio Discovery

by com.sdukstudio
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

request-discovery-call

Ask SDUK Studio for a discovery call about a possible software project. Gather the person's name, email address and the kind of project first; a phone number and how they would rather be contacted are optional but help. Everything else is optional and is better left unset than guessed. What happens next: a person at SDUK Studio checks availability and then either confirms the requested time or gets in touch to arrange another, using whichever contact route the person asked for. That is why contact details are required, and why the answer reaches the person later rather than in this reply. This SUBMITS A REQUEST, it does not complete the action. Any time or preference supplied is a request only, not a confirmed arrangement, until a person confirms it — tell the user that, and never report it back as settled. The result tells you what happened — report that back honestly.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
emailYes
phoneNoA phone number, if the person is happy to be rung. Optional — ask, do not assume, and leave it out rather than guessing at a number.
companyNo
countryNo
summaryNo
timelineNo
full-nameYes
project-typeYes
tenancy-needNoWhether many separate customer organisations will use the system ('multi-tenant') or just one ('single-org').
data-residencyNo
proposed-routeNoWhich part of SDUK Studio should take the work, if the person has a view. 'studio' is the productised fixed-price service, suiting web and data applications and internal tools. 'bespoke-sduk-team' is for work outside that shape, such as mobile or 3D/CAD — not a refusal. 'either' means both could fit. Leave unset if unclear; the call settles it.
requested-timeNoThe person's preferred date and time for the call, in their own words (for example 'Tuesday 23rd at 2pm' or 'next week, mornings'). UK time unless they say otherwise. A preference, not a slot.
compliance-levelNoWhich regime the system must satisfy: ordinary UK GDPR, NHS DSPT, FCA, another regulated regime, or unsure.
data-volume-bandNoA rough sense of how much data the system will hold — a judgement, not a measurement. Use 'unsure' rather than guessing.
alternative-timesNoAny other times that would also suit, in their own words. Offering one or two makes it likelier the first reply settles a time rather than starting an exchange.
entity-count-bandNoRoughly how many distinct kinds of record the system needs (customers, jobs, invoices and so on), not how many rows.
contact-preferenceNoHow the person would rather be reached about arranging the call: 'email', 'phone' or 'either'. Only offer 'phone' if a phone number has been supplied. Leave unset if they have no preference.
concurrent-users-bandNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed9 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / alternative-times / description
      Added value: +"Any other times that would also suit, in their own words. Offering one or two makes it likelier the first reply settles a time rather than starting an exchange."
    • addedInput schema / properties / compliance-level / description
      Added value: +"Which regime the system must satisfy: ordinary UK GDPR, NHS DSPT, FCA, another regulated regime, or unsure."
    • addedInput schema / properties / contact-preference
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "How the person would rather be reached about arranging the call: 'email', 'phone' or 'either'. Only offer 'phone' if a phone number has been supplied. Leave unset if they have no preference.",
+  "enum": [
+    "email",
+    "phone",
+    "either"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / data-volume-band / description
      Added value: +"A rough sense of how much data the system will hold — a judgement, not a measurement. Use 'unsure' rather than guessing."
    • addedInput schema / properties / entity-count-band / description
      Added value: +"Roughly how many distinct kinds of record the system needs (customers, jobs, invoices and so on), not how many rows."
    • addedInput schema / properties / phone
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "A phone number, if the person is happy to be rung. Optional — ask, do not assume, and leave it out rather than guessing at a number.",
+  "maxLength": 40,
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / proposed-route / description
      Added value: +"Which part of SDUK Studio should take the work, if the person has a view. 'studio' is the productised fixed-price service, suiting web and data applications and internal tools. 'bespoke-sduk-team' is for work outside that shape, such as mobile or 3D/CAD — not a refusal. 'either' means both could fit. Leave unset if unclear; the call settles it."
    • addedInput schema / properties / requested-time / description
      Added value: +"The person's preferred date and time for the call, in their own words (for example 'Tuesday 23rd at 2pm' or 'next week, mornings'). UK time unless they say otherwise. A preference, not a slot."
    • addedInput schema / properties / tenancy-need / description
      Added value: +"Whether many separate customer organisations will use the system ('multi-tenant') or just one ('single-org')."
  2. Added

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 full burden, and it delivers. It explicitly states 'This SUBMITS A REQUEST, it does not complete the action,' and that any time/preference is a request only, not confirmed until a person confirms. It also instructs the agent to tell the user this and report back honestly. This is exemplary transparency about the tool's asynchronous, non-confirming behavior.

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 long but every sentence is purposeful. It front-loads the action and required inputs, then explains optional fields and the follow-up process, and ends with critical behavioral caveats. There is no filler or repetition; it is dense yet efficiently structured.

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?

Given the complexity (18 parameters, 3 required, no output schema), the description is remarkably complete. It covers what to collect, what to leave out, what happens next, how to report results, and the need to communicate the request-only nature. An agent can use this tool correctly with the information provided.

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 description coverage is 50%, so the description must compensate. It explains the required fields (name, email, project-type) and clarifies optional ones (e.g., 'a phone number and how they would rather be contacted are optional but help'). It also gives high-level guidance about leaving things unset. While it doesn't detail every parameter, it sets clear expectations and compensates for the schema gaps.

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 clearly states the action: 'Ask SDUK Studio for a discovery call about a possible software project.' It specifies the resource (SDUK Studio, discovery call) and distinguishes from sibling tools like public-post and public-posts, which are different actions. The purpose is unambiguous.

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 firm usage guidance: gather name, email, and project type first; leave optional fields unset rather than guessing. It explains the asynchronous nature and how to report results. While it doesn't explicitly compare to siblings, the context is clear that this is a submission tool, not a completion tool. The guidance on optional fields is strong.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All SDUK Studio Discovery toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources