Skip to main content
Glama

site

by uk.co.penetrationtestingcost
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

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

submit_enquiry

Submits an enquiry to Penetration Testing 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: "Send my contact details to up to three Cyber Essentials and penetration testing providers, chosen by Penetration Testing Cost, who'll contact me directly. I'll be emailed each firm's name as my details go to it, and can stop any more firms getting them."

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
answersYesthe person's answers, keyed by field key
consentYestrue only when the person has agreed to: Send my contact details to up to three Cyber Essentials and penetration testing providers, chosen by Penetration Testing Cost, who'll contact me directly. I'll be emailed each firm's name as my details go to it, and can stop any more firms getting them.
confirmationNothe confirmation token from step 1, after the person has approved the summary

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / consent / description
      Previous value: -"true only when the person has agreed to: Send my contact details to up to three relevant penetration testing providers, chosen by Penetration Testing Cost, who'll contact me directly. I'll be emailed each firm's name as my details go to it, and can stop any more firms getting them."New value: +"true only when the person has agreed to: Send my contact details to up to three Cyber Essentials and penetration testing providers, chosen by Penetration Testing Cost, who'll contact me directly. I'll be emailed each firm's name as my details go to it, and can stop any more firms getting them."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / consent / description
      Previous value: -"true only when the person has agreed to: Happy for my details to go to relevant penetration testing providers, who'll contact me directly."New value: +"true only when the person has agreed to: Send my contact details to up to three relevant penetration testing providers, chosen by Penetration Testing Cost, who'll contact me directly. I'll be emailed each firm's name as my details go to it, and can stop any more firms getting them."
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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 is a validate-and-summarize dry run returning a consent line and token, that step 2 triggers an email with a link the person must click before any provider sees the data, and that details go to up to three named-at-send firms the person can stop. What it omits is failure behaviour — what happens if validation fails, what step 1 returns on bad answers, and whether either call is idempotent.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loads purpose and the purchase/quote disclaimer, then walks the two steps in order. The main inefficiency is the full consent sentence being quoted verbatim in the description and again in the consent parameter's schema description, which is duplicated real estate rather than new information.

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?

For a stateful two-call tool with a nested answers object and no output schema, the description supplies everything needed to call it correctly: the sequence, the required fields per step, the return of step 1, and the human-in-the-loop email verification that gates provider visibility.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% (baseline 3), but the description adds real meaning beyond it: it ties 'answers' to field keys sourced from enquiry_fields, explains that the confirmation token comes specifically from step 1 and is only to be used after approval, and spells out what consent=true commits the person to.

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 specific verb and resource (submits an enquiry to Penetration Testing Cost) and immediately bounds it with two negations — NOT a purchase, NOT a guaranteed quote — which an agent could easily confuse this with. It also names the sibling that supplies its input (enquiry_fields) so the tool's place in the workflow is unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives an explicit two-step protocol with the exact condition that selects each step: step 1 with answers + consent=true, step 2 only 'if the person agrees'. It also names the prerequisite source for field keys (enquiry_fields), leaving nothing to inference.

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
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources