enquiry_describeRead first. States plainly what submit_enquiry does on Take-Home Compass: 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?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It discloses what the tool returns and clarifies what submit_enquiry does not do, but it does not explicitly state that enquiry_describe itself is read-only or side-effect free. The 'Read first' phrasing implies safety, but the description could be more explicit.
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 and front-loaded with 'Read first.' All sentences convey useful information, though the title and description repeat the 'not a purchase / no guaranteed quote' idea. Overall it is efficient and scannable.
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 parameterless documentation tool with no output schema, the description gives enough detail about the returned information and the context of submit_enquiry. It could mention output format or length, but the agent has sufficient information to call and interpret the tool 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 parameter documentation is not needed. The description correctly focuses on what the tool returns rather than input semantics, matching the baseline for a parameterless tool.
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 plainly that this tool explains what submit_enquiry does rather than performing the enquiry itself, and it lists the specific content returned (recipient details, consent wording, confirmation method). It is clearly a documentation/read tool, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling tools like enquiry_fields.
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 opening 'Read first' is an explicit usage directive, telling the agent to consult this tool before acting. It also clarifies the scope of submit_enquiry (not a purchase, no guaranteed quote, free), which helps the agent decide when the broader enquiry flow is appropriate. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the context is sufficient.
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 purpose: schema, provenance, exact-row lookup, substring search, multi-value comparison, aggregate stats, top/bottom ranking, and enquiry lifecycle steps. Even the three query tools (dataset_row, dataset_compare, dataset_search) are semantically separate and described with enough precision to avoid misselection.
All tools follow a consistent snake_case pattern with a domain prefix: dataset_* for the data exploration tools and enquiry_* for the form workflow. The suffix is sometimes a noun (columns, provenance, fields) and sometimes a verb (search, compare, submit), but the uniform prefix and predictable structure make the set easy to navigate.
Ten tools is a well-scoped size for a server covering two related areas: dataset analysis and enquiry submission. Each tool earns its place; there is no obvious redundancy or bloat, and the split of seven dataset tools and three enquiry tools matches the apparent purpose.
The dataset tools cover schema discovery, provenance, filtering, searching, comparison, statistics, and ordering—a solid analytical surface. The only notable gap is a way to retrieve all rows at once without a filter, though that may be intentionally omitted since most queries are targeted. The enquiry tools form a complete describe-fields-submit flow.