Skip to main content
Glama

site

by uk.co.drainprices

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

submit_enquiry

Submits an enquiry to Drain Prices — 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 relevant local drainage engineers, who'll price the job 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 relevant local drainage engineers, who'll price the job 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

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It fully discloses the two-step validation/submission flow, the requirement for consent, the return of a summary and consent line in step 1, and the email-with-link behavior after submission. It also explicitly states what the tool does NOT do (purchase/quote), giving the agent an accurate behavioral model.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is longer than typical but appropriately so given the two-step process. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose and the 'NOT a purchase' clarification, then logically sequences the steps. Every sentence adds necessary context; no fluff. The length is justified by the complexity.

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 (two-step, consent, email verification) and the absence of an output schema, the description is remarkably complete. It explains what the tool returns at each step, what consent entails, and the post-submission flow. An agent has all necessary information to call the tool 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 descriptions cover 100% of parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context beyond the schema by explaining that 'answers' are keyed by field key from enquiry_fields, that 'confirmation' is the token from step 1, and by clarifying the consent semantics. This elevates it above the baseline.

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 tool's function: 'Submits an enquiry to Drain Prices' and explicitly distinguishes it from a purchase or a guaranteed quote. It also frames the two-step nature, making the purpose unambiguous and separable from siblings like enquiry_describe and enquiry_fields.

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 instructions: step 1 to validate and obtain a summary/token, step 2 to actually submit only after the person agrees. It also clarifies that consent must be true and defines what consent means. While it doesn't name alternative tools, the two-step workflow and the emphasis on 'NOT a purchase' effectively guide the agent on when and how to invoke it.

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

enquiry_describe explains what the service does, enquiry_fields provides the input schema, and submit_enquiry performs the actual submission. Each tool targets a clearly distinct aspect of the workflow, so an agent can select the correct one without ambiguity.

Naming Consistency4/5

All three tools share the 'enquiry' root, making the domain immediately clear. The arrangement differs slightly, with submit_enquiry using verb-first order while enquiry_describe and enquiry_fields lead with the noun, but the pattern remains readable and predictable.

Tool Count5/5

Three tools map cleanly onto a single narrow workflow: understand the service, inspect the fields, and submit the enquiry. Each tool earns its place, and the count is well-scoped for the server's stated purpose.

Completeness5/5

The surface covers the full path for the core action: describing the process, retrieving required field definitions, and submitting with a two-step confirmation. Purchasing and quoting are intentionally out of scope, so no essential operation is missing.

Resources