Skip to main content
Glama

site

by uk.co.industrialflooringcost

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

submit_enquiry

Submits an enquiry to Industrial Flooring Cost — 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 local industrial flooring contractors, who'll quote 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 local industrial flooring contractors, who'll quote 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

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden, and it discloses important behavior: validation on the first call, no submission until the second call, email with a link that must be clicked before providers see the enquiry, and the exact meaning of consent. This is strong transparency for a stateful, two-step write operation.

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 description is dense but organized, front-loading the critical 'not a purchase' distinction and then laying out Step 1 and Step 2 in sequence. Every sentence adds operational information an agent needs; no filler.

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?

For a tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is complete: it specifies inputs, the two-call protocol, the return values of step 1, the consent requirement, and the post-submission email flow. An agent can correctly sequence calls using this text alone.

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 meaningful semantics beyond the schema by explaining how answers, consent, and confirmation interact across the two steps, including the exact consent wording and the need to reuse the step-1 confirmation token.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('Submits an enquiry to Industrial Flooring Cost') and immediately disambiguates it from a purchase or a guaranteed quote. The two-step nature is stated upfront, making the tool's role clear relative to the enquiry workflow and to siblings such as enquiry_describe and enquiry_fields.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives explicit procedural guidance: call first with answers and consent=true to obtain a summary and confirmation token, then call again with the same data plus the token only if the person agrees. It also notes this is NOT a purchase, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer enquiry_describe or enquiry_fields over this tool, beyond referencing enquiry_fields for field keys.

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

A4.3/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clear, separate role: enquiry_describe explains the overall process, enquiry_fields provides the schema, and submit_enquiry performs the submission flow. There is no meaningful overlap between them.

Naming Consistency3/5

All names use snake_case and reference the enquiry domain, but the pattern is mixed: enquiry_describe and enquiry_fields are noun-led while submit_enquiry is verb-led. This is readable but not a uniform verb_noun convention.

Tool Count5/5

Three tools is a well-scoped set for a narrow enquiry-submission purpose. Each tool earns its place: overview, field definitions, and submission.

Completeness5/5

The tools cover the full flow needed for this domain: understand the service, retrieve the required fields, and submit with consent and confirmation. No update, delete, or status tools are necessary for this single-purpose server.

Resources