enquiry_describeRead first. States plainly what submit_enquiry does on Pest Control Prices: 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 behavioral burden and does so well. It discloses that this initiates an enquiry, not a purchase, that no quote is guaranteed, that it is free, and what the tool returns in terms of recipient information, consent wording, and confirmation steps.
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 'Read first.' Every sentence adds meaningful context: what the tool does, what it does not do, and what it returns. There is no filler or repetition of schema information.
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 parameterless description tool with no output schema, the description covers everything an agent needs: when to use it, what behavior it explains, key exclusions, and the content of the returned explanation. 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 has zero parameters, so the schema already has complete coverage by default. There is no parameter-level meaning for the description to add, making the baseline score of 4 appropriate.
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 identifies the tool as a descriptive explainer: it 'states plainly what submit_enquiry does' rather than performing the submission. It also distinguishes itself from submit_enquiry by emphasizing that nothing is bought, ordered, or paid, and that 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?
'Read first' is an explicit usage cue signaling that this tool is meant to be consulted before using submit_enquiry. It does not explicitly contrast with enquiry_fields, but the framing strongly implies a pre-submission orientation and the description makes the tool's role clear.
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 role: describe explains the process, fields provides the schema, and submit_enquiry performs the submission. There is no meaningful overlap between them.
The names are readable and all snake_case, but they mix patterns: enquiry_describe and enquiry_fields are noun-first, while submit_enquiry is verb-first. A more consistent set would be describe_enquiry, get_enquiry_fields, and submit_enquiry.
Three tools are well-scoped for a simple enquiry flow: describe the process, retrieve the fields, and submit with confirmation. Nothing feels unnecessary or missing.
The toolset fully covers the enquiry lifecycle presented by the server: understanding the process, discovering required fields, and submitting with explicit consent and confirmation. There are no obvious dead ends.