enquiry_fieldsEvery field of the Gearbox Repair Quotes 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?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of explaining behavior. It clearly conveys that this is a read-only metadata lookup by listing the contained field attributes, and it implies no side effects. It does not discuss output shape or edge cases, but for this simple tool the disclosure is adequate.
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?
Two compact sentences carry all necessary information. The first sentence front-loads the tool's content and purpose; the second provides workflow guidance. No filler 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?
For a zero-parameter, no-output-schema metadata tool, the description is complete enough: it specifies the returned content and connects the result to the submission workflow. It would be slightly stronger if it clarified how this relates to enquiry_describe or stated the return container explicitly.
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 takes zero parameters and the empty schema fully covers that. The description adds relevant context by explaining how the returned field keys should be used with submit_enquiry, which is helpful beyond the schema.
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 names a specific resource ('Gearbox Repair Quotes enquiry') and enumerates exactly what the tool exposes: key, label, type, required flag, help text, and options. It is clear and concrete, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling 'enquiry_describe'.
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 second sentence gives actionable guidance: pass answers to submit_enquiry keyed by the field key. This creates a clear workflow context, but it does not mention when not to use this tool or compare it with enquiry_describe.
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: enquiry_describe explains the overall flow, enquiry_fields provides the input schema, and submit_enquiry performs the actual submission. There is no overlap between them.
Two tools share the enquiry_ prefix, but submit_enquiry reverses the pattern to verb_noun. The naming is readable and not chaotic, but the inconsistent construction prevents a higher score.
Three tools is a well-scoped set for a simple enquiry submission workflow: one to explain, one to define fields, and one to submit. Each tool earns its place without unnecessary bloat.
The tool surface fully covers the enquiry workflow from discovery through schema retrieval to the two-step confirmed submission. There are no obvious missing operations for the stated purpose.