enquiry_describeRead first. States plainly what submit_enquiry does on Employment Contract Generator: 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, the description carries the full burden and does well: it states that nothing is bought, ordered, or paid, that no quote is guaranteed, and that the process is free. It also discloses what the tool returns: recipient details, consent wording, and confirmation method.
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 three sentences and front-loaded with the most important guidance: 'Read first.' Every sentence adds value, covering what the tool explains, what it does not mean, and what content it returns, with no 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?
For a documentation-style tool with no parameters and no output schema, this description is complete. It explains the tool's role, clarifies the non-transactional nature, and states exactly what information the returned description will contain.
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 input schema is empty, so there are no parameters to document. The description adds no parameter detail, but none is needed; the baseline of 4 applies for zero-parameter tools.
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 that this tool explains what submit_enquiry does on Employment Contract Generator, including starting an enquiry with human providers who quote directly. It also lists what the description returns, making the tool's purpose distinct from the action-oriented submit_enquiry sibling.
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 phrase 'Read first' explicitly signals that this tool should be consulted before using submit_enquiry. It gives clear context for when to use the tool, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it.
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.
The tools split cleanly into two workflows: the interactive checker (start, answer, tree) and the enquiry form (describe, fields, submit). Within each group, every tool has a distinct role, and the tree tool is clearly framed as the full end-to-end view rather than a step-by-step interaction.
Most tools follow a clear domain prefix pattern: checker_* and enquiry_*, with lowercase snake_case names. submit_enquiry breaks the prefix convention slightly, but it is still a plain verb_noun name and easily understood, so the overall pattern remains predictable.
Six tools is well-scoped for a site with two core features: a decision guide and a contact/enquiry flow. Each tool covers a necessary step without redundancy or bloat.
The checker workflow is complete with start, step-by-step navigation, and the full tree for end-to-end reasoning. The enquiry workflow is also complete with an overview, field schema, and a two-step consent-aware submission process, leaving no obvious dead ends.