Skip to main content
Glama

site

by uk.co.pubmortgagecalculator

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

submit_enquiry

Submits an enquiry to Pub Mortgage Calculator — 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 a broker who places pub and leisure finance, 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 a broker who places pub and leisure finance, 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

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It thoroughly explains the two-step validation flow, the return of a summary/consent line/confirmation token, the email link requirement before providers see the enquiry, and the exact consent wording. This is exemplary transparency for a mutation tool.

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?

The description is dense but well-organized with clear step markers and front-loaded exclusions. It is longer than minimal, but the extra length is largely justified by the two-step workflow. Some repetition of 'NOT a purchase / NOT a guaranteed quote' and the consent text exists, but it reinforces critical constraints.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a two-step tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the workflow, consent requirements, return values, and post-submission email behavior comprehensively. Minor gaps remain around validation failure responses and handling of invalid answers, but the description references enquiry_fields sufficiently to make the tool actionable.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful procedural semantics: answers must be keyed by field key from enquiry_fields, consent=true is only valid after the exact consent line is shown and agreed to, and the confirmation token is the step-1 output used in step 2. This goes beyond the schema's basic 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 states exactly what the tool does: it submits an enquiry to Pub Mortgage Calculator. It also explicitly clarifies what it is NOT (a purchase or a guaranteed quote), which distinguishes it from related actions and prevents misuse.

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 provides explicit step-by-step usage instructions: first call with answers and consent, then conditionally call again with the confirmation token only if the person agrees. It also directs the agent to enquiry_fields for the correct answer keys, making the workflow 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

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct concern: calculate runs the calculator, calculator_describe documents its inputs/outputs, enquiry_describe explains the submission flow, enquiry_fields provides the schema, and submit_enquiry performs the two-step submission. There is no real overlap in purpose despite some similar naming.

Naming Consistency2/5

The naming convention is inconsistent: some tools are verb-first (calculate, submit_enquiry) while others are noun-first (calculator_describe, enquiry_describe, enquiry_fields). The mixed ordering and inconsistent verb/noun placement make the tool names harder to predict.

Tool Count5/5

Five tools is well-scoped for a focused mortgage calculator and enquiry submission server. Each tool fills a necessary role, and there is no bloat or redundancy.

Completeness5/5

The surface covers the full workflow: understanding the calculator, executing it, reading the enquiry process, fetching the required fields, and submitting with two-step consent. There are no obvious missing operations for the stated purpose.

Resources