enquiry_describeRead first. States plainly what submit_enquiry does on Dilapidations Cost: 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 and does exceptionally well: it discloses no purchase/order/payment, no guaranteed quote, free nature, human providers, and what information is returned. This is rich behavioral context for a zero-parameter informational tool.
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 compact, front-loaded with 'Read first,' and every sentence adds meaningful information. It covers purpose, behavioral caveats, and return content without unnecessary filler.
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 description tool with no output schema, this is complete: it explains what the tool returns, sets expectations, and differentiates from the related submit_enquiry workflow. No crucial context 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?
There are zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameter semantics because none exist, and it instead focuses on the tool's output and context.
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 clearly identifies the tool as an informational pre-read that explains what submit_enquiry does, listing concrete points such as no purchase, no payment, and no guaranteed quote. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from the submit_enquiry sibling by saying 'Read first.'
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?
'Read first' gives a clear usage cue that this tool should be used before submit_enquiry, and the description positions it as the safe/exploratory alternative. It does not explicitly list when not to use it, but the context is unambiguous enough for this simple 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 targets a distinct stage: overview, field schema, and submission. enquiry_describe and enquiry_fields are both informational, but one explains flow and consent while the other exposes exact payload fields, leaving little ambiguity.
The names are readable and snake_case, but the pattern is mixed: enquiry_describe and enquiry_fields use a noun prefix while submit_enquiry uses verb-first naming. A fully consistent set would be something like enquiry_describe, enquiry_fields, enquiry_submit.
Three tools is well-scoped for the server's stated purpose: it exists only to help an agent learn about and submit a Dilapidations Cost enquiry. No tool feels redundant or unnecessary.
The set covers the entire enquiry workflow: discover what the action means, retrieve the required field schema, and submit with a two-step confirmation flow. There are no dead ends or missing operations for the declared domain.