Skip to main content
Glama

site

by uk.co.privatelabelmanufacturers

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

submit_enquiry

Submits an enquiry to Private Label Manufacturers — 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 private label manufacturers, 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 private label manufacturers, 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

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden and does so thoroughly. It reveals that the first call validates, the second call actually submits, an email with a link is sent, and no provider sees anything until the link is clicked. It also includes the exact consent wording, leaving no important side effects hidden.

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, with the most important caveat front-loaded and the two-step protocol clearly separated. Every sentence contributes necessary operational or consent-related information without redundancy.

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 the two-step consent-gated flow, email side effect, and lack of an output schema, the description is complete enough for an agent to execute the tool correctly. It explains required arguments, step sequencing, the confirmation token, and expected outcomes.

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?

Even though schema coverage is 100%, the description adds critical meaning: answers must be keyed by enquiry_fields keys, consent must reflect the exact quoted agreement, and confirmation is the step-1 token that must be reused only after the person approves. This goes well beyond the schema's field-level descriptions.

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 clearly states that the tool submits an enquiry to Private Label Manufacturers and explicitly distinguishes it from a purchase or guaranteed quote. The two-step nature of the submission is also made explicit, so an agent understands the tool's core role without needing to infer it.

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?

It provides explicit step-by-step guidance: step 1 requires answers and consent=true, returns a summary and token, and the agent must show the person the summary and consent line before step 2. It also states that step 2 should occur only if the person agrees, making the condition and sequence unambiguous.

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

A4.2/5.0
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 overlap or ambiguity between them.

Naming Consistency3/5

Naming is somewhat mixed: two tools use an 'enquiry_' prefix (enquiry_describe, enquiry_fields) while the action tool uses a verb-noun pattern (submit_enquiry). The pattern is still readable and predictable enough, but not fully consistent.

Tool Count5/5

With only three tools, the server is tightly scoped to its single purpose of handling enquiries. Each tool earns its place, and the count feels appropriate rather than thin.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the full enquiry lifecycle: understanding the process, retrieving required fields, and submitting with a two-step confirmation. There are no obvious gaps for the server's stated purpose.

Resources