enquiry_describeRead first. States plainly what submit_enquiry does on Knee Replacement Cost: 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?
With no annotations, the description takes the full burden and does it well: it states that nothing is bought, ordered, or paid, that no quote is guaranteed, that it is free, and what information the tool returns. This gives an agent the non-obvious behavioral boundaries without relying on annotations.
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?
Three sentences, each with a distinct job: orienting the reader, stating the core behavior, and summarizing return contents. The front-loaded 'Read first' is efficient and no sentence is wasted.
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 no-parameter descriptive tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it names the subject (submit_enquiry), the context (Knee Replacement Cost), clarifies what does not happen, and lists the return content. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly 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 input schema has zero properties, so parameter semantics are not applicable and the 0-param baseline is 4. The description appropriately focuses on behavior and return content rather than parameter details.
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 states a clear purpose: it 'States plainly what submit_enquiry does on Knee Replacement Cost' and describes the enquiry flow with human providers. The tool name and content clearly differentiate it from the action tool submit_enquiry and the field tool enquiry_fields.
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' is an explicit directive to consult this before acting, and the description frames the tool as the explanation of submit_enquiry, making the intended context clear. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use it, but the contrast with submit_enquiry is strongly implied.
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 process, enquiry_fields provides the data schema, and submit_enquiry performs the actual submission. There is no meaningful overlap in their purposes.
The tools all include the word 'enquiry' and use snake_case, but the pattern is inconsistent: 'enquiry_describe' and 'enquiry_fields' are object-first while 'submit_enquiry' is verb-first. This mixed convention is readable but not predictable.
Three tools is the right scope for a single, narrow enquiry submission flow. Each tool earns its place: one to orient, one to define the schema, and one to submit.
The set covers the full lifecycle of the enquiry: understanding what it is, discovering the required fields, and submitting with consent and confirmation. No obvious missing operations are needed for the stated purpose.