Skip to main content
Glama

site

by uk.co.employmentrightschecker

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

submit_enquiry

Submits an enquiry to Employment Rights Checker — 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 a specialist employment adviser, who'll contact me 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 a specialist employment adviser, who'll contact me 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

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals validation, the returned summary/consent line/token, the second submission call, the confirmation email, and the fact that providers only see the enquiry after the person clicks the link. This gives the agent an accurate model of side effects.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The length is justified by the two-step protocol and the legally meaningful consent text. It is front-loaded with the key caveat, then ordered as Step 1 and Step 2, and every clause contributes to preventing a costly misuse.

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?

With no output schema, the description explicitly names what Step 1 returns (summary, consent line, confirmation token) and the final outcome (email with click link before provider visibility). The answer source and consent requirement are covered, making the tool fully callable without additional inference.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by linking answers to 'field key from enquiry_fields' and explaining how consent and the confirmation token are used across the two steps. The exact consent wording is already in the schema, so the incremental value is real but modest.

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 states a specific action ('Submits an enquiry to Employment Rights Checker') and clearly distinguishes it from a purchase or guaranteed quote. The two-step nature is front-loaded, so an agent immediately understands what this tool does and what it does not do.

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 gives explicit step-by-step conditions: call first with answers and consent=true, get a summary/token, then call again only if the person agrees. It also provides a clear exclusion ('NOT a purchase, NOT a guaranteed quote') and explains when the second call is appropriate.

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

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

The tools split cleanly into two groups: the checker guide tools (start, answer, tree) and the enquiry tools (describe, fields, submit). Within each group, every tool has a distinct purpose with no meaningful overlap.

Naming Consistency3/5

All names are lowercase snake_case and use domain prefixes like checker_ and enquiry_, which helps. However, the relationship between prefix and action varies: checker_start and checker_tree are noun-like, enquiry_describe is object-verb, and submit_enquiry is verb-object, so the pattern is not fully consistent.

Tool Count5/5

Six tools is well-scoped for this server: three support navigating the decision guide and three support the enquiry submission flow. Each tool earns its place without redundancy or bloat.

Completeness5/5

The surface covers the full user journey: start the guide, answer questions, inspect the whole tree, understand the enquiry process, see required fields, and submit with two-step confirmation. There are no obvious dead ends or missing operations for the stated domain.

Resources