enquiry_fieldsEvery field of the Industrial Roofing 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?
With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It explicitly describes the output content: field key, label, type, required, help text, and options. This is sufficient for a read-only metadata retrieval tool with no side effects. It does not mention pagination or ordering, but those are not necessary for this simple, parameterless tool.
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 two sentences with no filler. The first sentence front-loads exactly what fields are returned, and the second adds actionable guidance for using the result. Every clause contributes meaningful information.
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 parameterless tool with no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool returns and how to consume it. It describes the domain ('Industrial Roofing Cost enquiry'), enumerates the metadata included, and connects the output to the submit_enquiry workflow. No critical information is missing.
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 has zero parameters and the schema coverage is 100%, so there is no parameter documentation burden. The description correctly focuses on the output structure and how to use it with submit_enquiry. This matches the baseline for a parameterless tool.
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 clearly identifies the resource ('every field of the Industrial Roofing Cost enquiry') and specifies what information is provided: key, label, type, required status, help text, and allowed options. It does not use an explicit verb like 'retrieve' or 'list', but the meaning is unambiguous. It also distinguishes itself from submit_enquiry by explaining that fields are used to key answers in that tool.
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 practical usage guidance: 'Pass answers to submit_enquiry keyed by field key.' This tells an agent that this tool is used to understand the enquiry fields before submitting answers via submit_enquiry. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention enquiry_describe, but the intended workflow is clear.
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: one explains the process, one provides the input schema, and one handles submission. There is no overlap between describing, field validation, and submitting.
All names use snake_case and are readable, but the pattern is slightly inconsistent: two tools start with 'enquiry_' (enquiry_describe, enquiry_fields) while one uses a verb-first form (submit_enquiry). The shared prefix provides conceptual consistency, but the verb/noun order varies.
Three tools is well-scoped for the narrow purpose of submitting an enquiry to a roofing cost service. Each tool is necessary and there is no bloat.
The tool surface covers the full flow: understanding the process, retrieving the required fields, and submitting with a two-step confirmation. No obvious missing operations exist for this single-purpose domain.