enquiry_fieldsEvery field of the Drivers' Hours Calculator enquiry: key, label, type, whether required, help text and the allowed options where there are any. Pass answers to submit_enquiry keyed by field key.
| 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, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It precisely lists the returned attributes (key, label, type, required, help, options) and implies a read-only operation, though it never states 'read-only' explicitly. For a metadata retrieval tool, this is adequate transparency.
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 two sentences with zero fluff. The core behavior is front-loaded, and the note about submit_enquiry adds value without redundancy. Highly efficient.
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?
Given no parameters and no output schema, the description fully specifies what the tool returns and how to use the result. It covers the output structure (list of fields with attributes) and the downstream usage, making it complete for the tool's simple purpose.
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 the description correctly omits parameter explanations. Baseline for 0 params is 4, and no additional parameter semantics are needed.
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 the tool returns every field of the Drivers' Hours Calculator enquiry, enumerating key, label, type, required flag, help text, and allowed options. This is specific and distinct from siblings like calculate or submit_enquiry, leaving no ambiguity about the tool's function.
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 description explicitly connects the tool to submit_enquiry by instructing to pass answers keyed by field key, which signals when to use it (as a prerequisite). However, it does not mention alternatives or when not to use it, so it stops short of full routing guidance.
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: running the calculator, describing the calculator, explaining the enquiry process, listing enquiry fields, and submitting an enquiry. There is no meaningful overlap or ambiguity between them.
Names are readable and mostly memorable, but they mix verb-first forms like calculate and submit_enquiry with noun-first forms like calculator_describe and enquiry_describe. The pattern is not fully consistent, though it is still understandable.
Five tools is a lean but well-scoped set for the site's purpose: calculator execution, calculator documentation, enquiry explanation, enquiry schema, and enquiry submission. Each tool earns its place without redundancy.
The tool surface covers the full user journey for both calculator usage and the two-step enquiry submission, including field discovery and consent handling. No obvious gaps or dead ends are visible for the stated domain.