Skip to main content
Glama

site

by uk.co.concretepumpinghire

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

submit_enquiry

Submits an enquiry to Concrete Pumping Hire — 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 local concrete pumping contractors, 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 local concrete pumping contractors, 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

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does so thoroughly. It discloses the two-step validation flow, the consent requirement with the exact consent text, the email with a required click-through, and that providers only see the enquiry after that click. This is strong transparency about side effects and sequencing.

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 longer than average but every sentence earns its place by explaining a necessary workflow step or constraint. It front-loads the critical 'not a purchase' clarification and then logically structures the two-step process without redundancy.

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 complex two-step tool with no output schema, the description fully explains what step 1 returns (summary, consent line, confirmation token), what step 2 requires, and what happens after submission (email link, provider visibility). An agent has enough information to invoke the tool correctly across both steps.

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 the input schema already documents all parameters, the description adds meaningful workflow semantics: answers are keyed by field key from enquiry_fields, consent must match the exact consent line, and confirmation is the token returned in step 1 after approval. This enriches the bare schema definitions with operational meaning.

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 identifies the action (submitting an enquiry), the resource (Concrete Pumping Hire), and explicitly distinguishes it from a purchase or guaranteed quote. It also names the two-step workflow, making the tool's purpose unambiguous relative to its 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 provides explicit step-by-step usage guidance: step 1 with answers and consent=true to get a token, then step 2 only after the person agrees and with the token. It also states the exclusion condition ('NOT a purchase, NOT a guaranteed quote'), giving clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use context.

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

A4.3/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clear, non-overlapping role: describe the enquiry flow, expose the field schema, and submit with required confirmation. No two tools could plausibly be selected for the same task.

Naming Consistency3/5

All names are readable snake_case, but the pattern is mixed: two tools start with the noun prefix 'enquiry_' while the third uses verb-first 'submit_enquiry', and 'enquiry_fields' is a noun phrase rather than a verb_noun action.

Tool Count5/5

Three tools cover the narrow enquiry-submission process exactly: context, schema, and submission. Each tool earns its place without redundancy.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface fully supports the intended flow: intro, field discovery, and two-step consent-confirm submission. There are no obvious dead ends or missing operations for the stated purpose.

Resources