Skip to main content
Glama

site

by uk.co.commercialheatpumpcost

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

submit_enquiry

Submits an enquiry to Commercial Heat Pump Cost — 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 commercial heat pump installers, 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 commercial heat pump installers, 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

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses validation behavior, the step-1 return values, the email-with-link side effect, and the condition that providers only see the enquiry after the link is clicked. This gives the agent accurate expectations for a stateful multi-step operation.

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 front-loaded with the core action and caveats, then organized into clear Step 1 and Step 2 instructions. Every sentence contributes necessary workflow, consent, or side-effect information, with no filler or repetition.

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 consent-based submission tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it explains what step 1 returns, what must happen before step 2, what step 2 does, and what the person receives afterward. The agent has enough information to run the workflow correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real value: answers are keyed by field key from enquiry_fields, consent must be true and means the exact quoted consent line, and confirmation is the token from step 1 used only after the person approves. This is more than the schema alone provides.

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 specific verb and resource: 'Submits an enquiry to Commercial Heat Pump Cost'. It also draws an important boundary with 'NOT a purchase, NOT a guaranteed quote', and the two-step flow distinguishes it from the enquiry_describe and enquiry_fields siblings.

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 an explicit two-step invocation sequence with conditions: call first with answers and consent, then call again only if the person agrees, using the confirmation token. It also references enquiry_fields for keying answers, and states when this tool is not appropriate.

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

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a distinct purpose: enquiry_describe explains the process, enquiry_fields gives the schema, and submit_enquiry performs the two-step submission. There is no overlap that would confuse an agent.

Naming Consistency3/5

All names are snake_case and share the enquiry token, but the ordering is mixed: enquiry_describe and enquiry_fields are noun-first, while submit_enquiry is verb-first. The set is readable, but the pattern is not consistently applied.

Tool Count5/5

Three tools is well-scoped for a single-purpose enquiry submission flow. Each tool has a clear role in the workflow with no redundancy.

Completeness5/5

The set covers the full flow: read what the enquiry does, inspect all fields, then submit with consent and confirmation. There are no obvious dead ends or missing operations for the stated purpose.

Resources