enquiry_describeRead first. States plainly what submit_enquiry does on P11D Changes: 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 full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits of the enquiry process it describes: nothing is bought, ordered, or paid; no quote is guaranteed; it is free. It also states what the tool returns (recipient details, consent wording, confirmation method), making the tool's informational nature clear.
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: 'Read first' immediately signals priority, followed by the core explanation and supporting caveats. Every sentence adds distinct value without redundancy or fluff.
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?
Given the tool has no parameters, no output schema, and a simple descriptive role, the description fully covers what an agent needs: what the tool does, why it matters, what it returns, and how it relates to submit_enquiry. Nothing essential 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 accepts zero parameters, so the description is not expected to explain parameter meaning. The baseline of 4 applies, and the description adds no unnecessary param-related detail.
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 states this tool's purpose: it explains what submit_enquiry does, using a specific verb ('States plainly') and resource ('what submit_enquiry does on P11D Changes'). It differentiates from the sibling submit_enquiry by describing the action rather than performing it, and the title reinforces the outcome ('an ENQUIRY with a human, not a purchase').
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 use this tool before engaging with submit_enquiry, providing clear context. It does not name alternatives or explicitly state when not to use it, but the purpose is self-contained enough for an agent to infer the appropriate timing.
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.
The checker tools are distinct: start begins, answer advances step-by-step, and tree provides the full decision graph for offline reasoning. The enquiry tools also separate concerns: describe explains semantics, fields provides schema, and submit performs the action. checker_tree and checker_answer overlap slightly in information content, but their intended uses are clearly differentiated.
The checker_* and enquiry_* prefixes create clear clusters, and the suffixes are mostly readable and predictable. submit_enquiry breaks the prefix pattern by placing the verb before the noun, and tree/fields are nouns while start/answer/describe are verbs, but the conventions are still coherent enough to navigate.
Six tools is a well-scoped count for a server covering two related workflows: decision-tree navigation and enquiry submission. Each tool serves a distinct and necessary step, with no redundancy or bloat.
The checker workflow is complete: start, step-by-step answering, and a full tree for end-to-end reasoning. The enquiry workflow is also complete: explanation, field schema, permission/consent handling, and two-step submission. There are no obvious dead ends or missing lifecycle steps for the stated domain.