enquiry_describeRead first. States plainly what submit_enquiry does on Measured Survey 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 carries the disclosure burden. It transparently states what the tool returns ('who receives the details, the consent wording, and how the person confirms') and clarifies the underlying process ('it is free; no quote is guaranteed'). It stops short of explicitly declaring the tool itself read-only, but the framing 'States plainly what...' strongly implies no side effects.
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 short sentences with the two-word imperative 'Read first.' front-loaded, followed by purpose and then return details. Every sentence earns its place without redundancy or filler.
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 fully covers what the tool does, the context (Measured Survey Cost), the return contents (recipients, consent wording, confirmation), and the important caveats (free, no purchase, no guaranteed quote). Nothing an agent needs to decide whether to call it 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 an empty input schema, so there is no parameter-level meaning to add. A baseline of 4 is appropriate for the no-parameter case, and the description correctly spends no space on inputs.
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 specific verb-resource relationship: 'States plainly what submit_enquiry does on Measured Survey Cost.' The title reinforces the scope by contrasting 'an ENQUIRY with a human' with 'not a purchase, not a guaranteed quote,' which distinguishes it from the action-oriented sibling submit_enquiry.
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 ordering cue that places this tool before submit_enquiry, and the emphasis that 'nothing is bought, ordered or paid' signals a safe, no-commitment understanding step. It does not explicitly name enquiry_fields as the alternative for collecting fields, so exclusions are implied rather than stated.
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 purpose: enquiry_describe explains the process, enquiry_fields provides the schema, and submit_enquiry performs the submission. There is no functional overlap or ambiguity.
The names are readable and all relate to the 'enquiry' domain, but the pattern is mixed: enquiry_describe and enquiry_fields use a prefix pattern while submit_enquiry is verb-first. Not chaotic, but not a consistent verb_noun convention.
Three tools cover the full enquiry submission flow without redundancy: orientation, schema discovery, and submission. The count is well-scoped for the server's narrow purpose.
The tool set covers the complete lifecycle needed here: understand the process, inspect the required fields, and submit with consent and confirmation. There are no obvious gaps or dead ends for the declared domain.