enquiry_describeRead first. States plainly what submit_enquiry does on HMO Licence Checker: 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?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that the tool explains what submit_enquiry does, returns details about who receives the enquiry, consent wording, and confirmation method, and clarifies that nothing is bought or guaranteed. It does not explicitly say the tool itself has no side effects, but the describe/return framing makes this sufficiently clear.
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 short sentences with the key directive ('Read first') and core purpose front-loaded. Each sentence contributes distinct information: what it does, what it does not do, and what it returns.
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 tool with no output schema, the description fully conveys the outcome and the content of the returned information. It covers the non-transactional nature, the human-provider behavior, and the return contents, leaving no significant gap for an agent deciding whether to call it.
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?
This tool has zero parameters, so the 0-param baseline of 4 applies. The description does not need to explain parameter semantics that do not exist.
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 uses a specific verb ('states plainly') and names the exact resource: what submit_enquiry does on HMO Licence Checker. It also distinguishes itself from submit_enquiry by clarifying it is not the submission itself, and the title reinforces the distinction by emphasizing that no purchase or guaranteed quote is involved.
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?
'Read first' gives a clear temporal instruction to consult this description before acting, and it names submit_enquiry as the operation it explains. It does not explicitly enumerate when not to use this tool or address the checker_* siblings, so it stops short of a 5.
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 checker_* tools are clearly separated from the enquiry_* tools, and each has a distinct role: start, traverse, or view the full decision tree. However, checker_answer and checker_tree could be confused by an agent looking to answer a single question, since both expose question/option/verdict data.
The checker_ and enquiry_ prefixes provide a useful grouping, but the individual names mix conventions: checker_start and checker_tree are noun-like, checker_answer and enquiry_describe are noun-verb, enquiry_fields is noun-noun, and submit_enquiry is verb-noun. The pattern is readable but not consistently applied.
Six tools is a well-scoped count for a server covering two related workflows: the HMO licence decision guide and the enquiry submission flow. Each tool has a clear purpose and none feel redundant or excessive.
The decision guide is fully covered with start, step-by-step traversal, and full-tree reasoning, enabling both interactive and end-to-end use. The enquiry flow is also complete: context, schema, validation, consent, and two-step submission are all represented.