Skip to main content
Glama

site

by uk.co.postcodecouncil

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

submit_enquiry

Submits an enquiry to Postcode Council — 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 advisers who handle local authority matters, who'll contact 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 advisers who handle local authority matters, who'll contact 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

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full disclosure burden and meets it well. It reveals that Step 1 is validation-only, Step 2 actually submits the enquiry and triggers an email with a link that the person must click before providers see anything, and it quotes the exact required consent text. This goes far beyond what a schema typically conveys.

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 well-structured, using 'Step 1' and 'Step 2' to convey a sequential flow without wasted words. The title reinforces the key caveats ('two steps; not a purchase'), and every sentence in the description earns its place by adding necessary behavioral or sequencing detail.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description appropriately explains what Step 1 returns (summary, consent line, confirmation token) and what happens after Step 2 (submission, email link, provider visibility only after link click). It also ties into enquiry_fields for answer keying, giving an agent the full call sequence needed to use the tool correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents each parameter at a basic level. The description adds meaningful orchestration context: answers must be keyed by field keys from enquiry_fields, confirmation is the token returned in Step 1 and used only in Step 2, and consent must remain true only after the person approves the summary. This enriches the parameters beyond their schema definitions.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Submits an enquiry to Postcode Council' and immediately distinguishes the tool from a purchase or guaranteed quote. It then explains the two-step nature, making the tool's purpose and scope unambiguous even without opening the schema.

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?

The description gives explicit when-to-call instructions: Step 1 uses answers and consent=true to validate and get a token; Step 2 is only invoked 'if the person agrees' with the same answers, consent, and token. It also states what the tool is not for ('NOT a purchase, NOT a guaranteed quote'), providing clear usage boundaries.

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

A4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

The tools split into two clear clusters: the checker tools (start, answer, tree) each serve distinct roles in navigating the decision guide, and the enquiry tools (describe, fields, submit) cover explanation, schema, and submission. There is no functional overlap that would cause an agent to select the wrong tool.

Naming Consistency3/5

All names use snake_case and are readable, but the conventions are mixed: checker_* uses a noun prefix with a trailing verb/noun, while submit_enquiry reverses the verb_noun pattern and enquiry_describe puts the domain before the verb. The inconsistency is noticeable but not chaotic.

Tool Count5/5

Six tools is well-scoped for a site that combines an interactive decision guide and a form submission flow. Each tool earns its place and there is no excess or thinness.

Completeness5/5

The checker cluster fully covers the decision tree lifecycle (start, progress, inspect full tree), and the enquiry cluster fully covers explanation, schema discovery, and two-step consent-based submission. No critical dead ends or missing operations are evident for the stated purpose.

Resources