Skip to main content
Glama

site

by nz.co.conveyancingfees

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

submit_enquiry

Submits an enquiry to Conveyancing Fees NZ — 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 relevant NZ property lawyers and conveyancing practitioners, who'll quote 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 relevant NZ property lawyers and conveyancing practitioners, who'll quote 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 the full burden and delivers: validation, summary and consent line return, confirmation token semantics, email notification, and the requirement that the person click a link before any provider sees the enquiry. The exact consent wording is included, which is operationally important.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well-structured with Step 1/Step 2 and front-loads the 'not a purchase, not a guaranteed quote' caveat. It is slightly long and repeats the consent text already in the schema, but the redundancy is minimal and the workflow details justify the length.

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 two-step tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the full lifecycle: preconditions, consent wording, what each step returns, and post-submit behavior via email link. An agent has enough context to invoke it correctly end-to-end.

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?

The schema already covers all parameters fully, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds lifecycle meaning: answers come from enquiry_fields, consent has exact wording and must be true only after agreement, and confirmation is the step-1 token reused in step 2. This is meaningful additional context.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource ('Submits an enquiry to Conveyancing Fees NZ') and explicitly excludes purchase and quote behavior. It clearly distinguishes this tool from the sibling tools by referencing enquiry_fields for answer keys.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It provides a precise two-step protocol: first call with answers and consent=true to obtain a token, then call again only after the person agrees, with the same answers, consent, and token. It also states the 'not a purchase' caveat and references enquiry_fields for key structure.

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

A4.2/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct role: enquiry_describe explains the process, enquiry_fields provides the schema, and submit_enquiry performs the submission. There is no meaningful overlap between them, and the descriptions reinforce their boundaries.

Naming Consistency2/5

Tool names mix ordering patterns: enquiry_describe is noun-verb, enquiry_fields is noun-noun, and submit_enquiry is verb-noun. All are readable and lowercase, but the inconsistent verb placement makes the naming style feel uneven.

Tool Count5/5

Three tools is well-scoped for a single enquiry submission flow: orientation, field discovery, and submission. Each tool earns its place and there is no unnecessary bloat.

Completeness5/5

The tool set fully covers the enquiry lifecycle: understanding the service, retrieving the form schema, and submitting with consent and confirmation. The two-step submission process is handled within submit_enquiry, so no additional tools are needed for this domain.

Resources