enquiry_describeRead first. States plainly what submit_enquiry does on Dilapidations Quotes: 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 well: it states that nothing is bought, ordered, or paid, that no quote is guaranteed, that it is free, and that it returns details about recipients, consent wording, and confirmation. This gives the agent a clear model of expected behavior without relying on structured metadata.
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 and front-loaded with the imperative 'Read first.' Every sentence adds distinct information: what the tool explains, what it does not do, and what it returns. There is no wasted text or redundancy.
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?
The description is sufficiently complete for a parameterless informational tool with no output schema. It explains the tool's role, key exclusions, and the specific content it returns. A small gap is that it does not explicitly contrast itself with enquiry_fields, though the 'Read first' framing makes the intended placement clear.
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?
The tool has zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to clarify. The description appropriately focuses on the tool's behavior and return content rather than inputs, meeting the baseline for a parameterless tool.
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 states what the tool does: it explains what submit_enquiry does on Dilapidations Quotes, including that it starts an enquiry with human providers. It also distinguishes the scope from a purchase or guaranteed quote, which differentiates it from sibling tools like submit_enquiry.
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?
The opening 'Read first' implies the tool should be used before submitting an enquiry, and the description explicitly references submit_enquiry as the action being explained. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the intended usage context is clear.
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 has a clearly distinct role: one explains the process, one provides the schema, and one performs the submission. There is no overlapping functionality between them.
Naming is readable but inconsistent: enquiry_describe and enquiry_fields use a noun-first pattern, while submit_enquiry uses verb-first. A consistent pattern like get_enquiry_info, get_enquiry_fields, submit_enquiry would be clearer.
Three tools fit the narrow purpose of submitting an enquiry: overview, field definitions, and submission. Each tool is necessary and there is no bloat.
The set covers the full enquiry workflow described: understanding the process, retrieving field requirements, and submitting with consent confirmation. There are no obvious dead ends or missing steps for the stated domain.