enquiry_describeRead first. States plainly what submit_enquiry does on Lease Renewal 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?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that the tool starts an enquiry with human providers, has no purchase or payment implications, does not guarantee a quote, is free, and returns recipient details, consent wording, and confirmation method. This is thorough and accurate for an informational read-only 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 compact and front-loaded with the key directive 'Read first.' Every sentence adds meaningful information: what the tool does, what it does not do, and what it returns. There is no fluff or redundancy.
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 informational tool with no output schema, the description is complete. It explains the operation's meaning, its non-transactional nature, and the content of the response. An agent has everything it needs to invoke this tool appropriately.
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, so the baseline for parameter semantics is 4. The description appropriately focuses on behavior and return content rather than parameters, and no additional parameter information is needed.
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 informational purpose: it explains what submit_enquiry does on Lease Renewal Cost, distinguishing the tool from actual submission. It explicitly defines scope by saying nothing is bought, ordered, or paid, and no quote is guaranteed.
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 opening 'Read first' clearly signals that this tool should be used before submitting an enquiry, giving practical guidance about sequencing. It does not explicitly discuss when to use enquiry_fields or when not to use this tool, so exclusions are absent but context is clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.