Skip to main content
Glama

site

by uk.co.clubgrants

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

submit_enquiry

Submits an enquiry to Club Grants — 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 a relevant club funding adviser, who'll contact 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 a relevant club funding adviser, who'll contact 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

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the burden and does so thoroughly. It discloses the two-step validation flow, the consent text, the confirmation token, and the post-submission email with a click link before any provider sees the enquiry.

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 well-structured with explicit step labels and front-loaded 'NOT a purchase' disambiguation. Every sentence contributes necessary operational detail without wasted words.

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 of a two-step consent-gated submission and the absence of an output schema, the description is complete. It explains the return values (summary, consent line, token), the required user agreement, and the post-submission email/link behavior, leaving no ambiguity for correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Although schema description coverage is 100%, the description adds meaning beyond the schema: answers must be keyed by field keys from enquiry_fields, consent must match the exact consent statement, and confirmation is the token returned in step 1. This clarifies the relationships between parameters and the workflow.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Submits an enquiry to Club Grants', and immediately distinguishes itself from a purchase or guaranteed quote. It also references enquiry_fields, clarifying its role relative to a sibling tool that supplies the 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?

The description gives explicit step-by-step instructions: Step 1 calls with answers and consent to get validation, summary and token; Step 2 calls again only if the person agrees, with the same answers, consent, and token. It also states what it is NOT (not a purchase, not a guaranteed quote), preventing misuse.

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

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

The six tools split cleanly into two distinct workflows: the checker_* set for the decision guide and the enquiry_* plus submit_enquiry set for Club Grants enquiries. Each tool has a clear, non-overlapping role, and the descriptions reinforce the boundaries.

Naming Consistency4/5

The checker_* and enquiry_* prefixes create a predictable prefix-based pattern, and submit_enquiry is clear in meaning. However, submit_enquiry breaks the pattern by placing the verb first instead of following it with the prefix, making the naming slightly inconsistent.

Tool Count5/5

Six tools is well-scoped for the server's purpose: three tools cover the decision-guide workflow and three support the enquiry workflow. Each tool earns its place without redundancy or unnecessary expansion.

Completeness5/5

The decision-guide tools cover starting, progressing, and inspecting the full tree, so the workflow is fully traversable. The enquiry tools cover field discovery, process explanation, submission, validation, and confirmation, leaving no critical dead ends for the stated domain.

Resources