Skip to main content
Glama

site

by uk.co.measuredsurveycost

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

submit_enquiry

Submits an enquiry to Measured Survey 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 relevant measured survey firms, 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 relevant measured survey firms, 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

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so well: it discloses that step 1 validates and returns a summary, consent line, and token; that submission only occurs in step 2; that an email with a click-link is sent; and that providers see the enquiry only after the click. This far exceeds a generic 'submits'.

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 structured with explicit 'Step 1' and 'Step 2' markers, and every sentence adds necessary operational detail. The title front-loads the key caveats ('two steps; not a purchase'). Nothing is wasted.

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?

Given that there is no output schema and no annotations, the description is complete: it specifies what step 1 returns, what triggers step 2, what side effects occur (email, provider visibility), and the exact consent text. An agent has everything needed to handle the human-in-the-loop flow correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, and the description adds meaningful process semantics: answers are keyed by enquiry_fields, consent must match the quoted consent line, and the optional confirmation field is the token from step 1. This resolves real ambiguity about when and how each parameter is used.

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?

States a concrete action and resource: 'Submits an enquiry to Measured Survey Cost', and immediately disambiguates with 'NOT a purchase, NOT a guaranteed quote.' Even without naming sibling tools, the two-step submission purpose is clearly distinct from 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?

Provides explicit call sequencing: Step 1 with answers+consent, then Step 2 with answers+consent+confirmation token only after the person approves. It also states exclusions ('not a purchase, not a guaranteed quote') and the human-approval condition. It stops short of explicitly naming sibling alternatives, so not a 5.

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

A4.6/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

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.

Naming Consistency3/5

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.

Tool Count5/5

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.

Completeness5/5

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.

Resources