Skip to main content
Glama

site

by uk.co.cqcregistrationchecker

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

submit_enquiry

Submits an enquiry to CQC Registration Checker — 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 CQC registration consultant, 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 CQC registration consultant, 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

A4.7/5.0
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 it does so thoroughly. It discloses the two-step validation flow, the returned summary/consent line/token, the need to show the person before proceeding, the email with a link, and the fact that providers only see the enquiry after the link is clicked. It also quotes the exact consent wording.

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 dense but every element is necessary. It front-loads the key caveat ('NOT a purchase'), then structures the behavior into clear Step 1 and Step 2 stages. The consent text is quoted exactly, adding precision 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?

Given the tool's complexity — a two-step human submission flow with no output schema — the description covers validation, return values, user consent, confirmation token reuse, email delivery, and the click-before-view condition. Nothing essential for correctly invoking the tool is missing.

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?

Although schema coverage is 100%, the description adds meaningful workflow semantics beyond the schema: answers must be keyed by field keys from enquiry_fields, consent must be true and reflect the quoted consent line, and the confirmation token comes from step 1. These details connect the parameters to the two-step process rather than merely restating their types.

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 verb ('Submits an enquiry') and the resource ('to CQC Registration Checker'), while also explicitly contrasting it with a purchase and a quote. It effectively distinguishes this submission action from the sibling exploration and field-description tools by emphasizing the two-step submission process.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description provides detailed step-by-step guidance: step 1 calls with answers and consent, then step 2 requires the consenting user and confirmation token. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives, but the 'NOT a purchase, NOT a guaranteed quote' clarifications and the two-step workflow give sufficient when-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

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a distinct role: checker_start initializes the flow, checker_answer advances it, checker_tree provides the full decision guide, while enquiry_describe and enquiry_fields explain the form in two complementary ways and submit_enquiry handles submission. There is no meaningful overlap that would cause an agent to select the wrong tool.

Naming Consistency3/5

The checker_* and enquiry_* prefixes impose some structure, and all names are lowercase snake_case. However, submit_enquiry breaks the prefix convention and enquiry_describe reverses the typical verb-object order, making the naming pattern less predictable than it could be.

Tool Count5/5

Six tools is a well-scoped count for the server's purpose. Each tool maps to a necessary step in either the decision-guide workflow or the enquiry submission workflow, without superfluous additions.

Completeness5/5

The decision guide is fully covered with start, answer, and full-tree tools, while the enquiry workflow is covered end-to-end from description and fields through consent-based submission. There are no obvious missing operations that would block an agent from completing either workflow.

Resources