enquiry_describeRead first. States plainly what submit_enquiry does on BNG Quotes: 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 provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does this well: it states that nothing is bought, ordered, or paid for, that no quote is guaranteed, that the service is free, and it explicitly lists what the tool returns, including who receives the details, the consent wording, and confirmation mechanics.
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 three sentences with no wasted words. The most important guidance ('Read first') is front-loaded, followed by a plain explanation of the flow and then the return-value specifics. Every sentence earns its place.
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-parameter, purely informational tool with no output schema, the description is complete. It explains what the tool does, the key caveats (no purchase, no guaranteed quote, free), and what information it returns. No critical context needed to call or interpret this tool is missing.
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 there is no parameter documentation burden. The description adds useful context about what the returned information covers, which is the closest analogue to parameter semantics for this tool. A baseline of 4 is appropriate for a zero-parameter tool with a helpful description.
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 uses a specific verb ('States plainly') and a specific resource ('what submit_enquiry does on BNG Quotes'), making the informational nature of this tool clear. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling submit_enquiry by explicitly not performing the submission, and from enquiry_fields by focusing on behavior and outcomes rather than input 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 a clear directive to consult this tool before acting, and the description explains what the underlying submit_enquiry flow entails. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say 'use this instead of enquiry_fields', but the context is clear enough for an agent to know this is the orientation/explanation tool.
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 covers a separate concern: explaining the process, providing the field schema, and submitting the enquiry. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them.
The names are readable but not consistently patterned: enquiry_describe and enquiry_fields place the noun first, while submit_enquiry uses verb-first convention. This mix is understandable but lacks a uniform scheme.
Three tools is exactly right for the narrow scope of submitting an enquiry. Each tool serves a clear and necessary purpose with no redundancy.
The tool set fully covers the enquiry workflow: orientation, field discovery, validation, consent, and confirmation. There are no obvious missing operations for the stated domain.