enquiry_fieldsEvery field of the Generator Servicing Cost 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 full transparency burden. It clearly implies a read-only lookup by describing the field catalog and its contents, and it discloses the relevant output semantics for downstream use. It does not mention pagination or authentication, but for a zero-parameter field-listing tool this is a minor gap.
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 tight sentences: the first front-loads the complete list of returned attributes, and the second provides the actionable link to submit_enquiry. Every word earns its place and there is no repetition of the title.
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 simple, parameterless lookup tool with no output schema, the description fully conveys what is returned and how to use the result. It even adds the cross-tool relationship to submit_enquiry, making the description adequate on its own.
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 accepts zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly adds no parameter-specific information because none exists. There is nothing missing here.
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 ('Generator Servicing Cost enquiry') and enumerates exactly what is returned: key, label, type, required, help text, and options. It does so without an explicit verb like 'list', but the meaning is unambiguous and the resource is precisely bounded. It distinguishes itself from submit_enquiry, though not from 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 description gives clear practical context: obtain field keys from this tool, then pass answers to submit_enquiry keyed by those field keys. This tells an agent when this tool is useful and how it connects to a sibling, though it does not explicitly discuss when not to use it or contrast 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: describe explains the process, fields provides the schema, and submit performs the submission. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them.
All tool names follow the consistent 'enquiry_' prefix plus a clear verb or noun: describe, fields, submit. The pattern is uniform and predictable.
Three tools are well-scoped for the single enquiry submission workflow. Each tool earns its place and the count is appropriate for the narrow purpose.
The tool set covers the full enquiry lifecycle: reading guidance, fetching field definitions, and submitting with a confirmation token. No obvious gaps exist for the stated purpose.