Skip to main content
Glama

site

by uk.co.shiftpatterngenerator

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

submit_enquiry

Submits an enquiry to Shift Pattern Generator — 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 rota and workforce scheduling suppliers, 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 rota and workforce scheduling suppliers, 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, the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It transparently explains the two-step validation flow, the confirmation token, consent semantics, the email link that must be clicked before any provider sees the enquiry, and the exact consent wording. This is unusually complete.

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 longer than average but every sentence earns its place: the purchase disclaimer, step 1, step 2, the email requirement, and the consent text. The step-by-step structure makes the flow easy to follow, and the critical 'NOT a purchase' wording is front-loaded.

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?

This is a stateful two-step tool with no output schema, yet the description covers the inputs, the intermediate response, the confirmation token, the human approval requirement, and the email link behavior. The reference to enquiry_fields also connects it to the sibling tool needed to obtain valid answer keys.

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?

All parameters are already described in the schema, giving a baseline of 3. The description adds meaningful context by specifying that answers are keyed by field keys from enquiry_fields, that consent=true is required at both steps, and that confirmation is the token returned from step 1. This goes beyond the schema's parameter 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 states a specific verb and resource: 'submits an enquiry to Shift Pattern Generator', and immediately clarifies that it is NOT a purchase or a guaranteed quote. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like calculate and enquiry_describe, and the title reinforces the two-step nature.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description gives explicit step-by-step usage context: call once for validation and a confirmation token, then call again only after person approval. It also ties answers to 'enquiry_fields', implying the sibling tool is used first, but it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool versus alternatives.

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

The calculator and enquiry tool groups are cleanly separated, and each tool has a distinct role: running versus describing the calculator, and describing, field-listing, or submitting an enquiry. Even the two describe tools are unambiguous because their prefixes identify which resource they document.

Naming Consistency2/5

Naming conventions are mixed: calculate is a bare verb, calculator_describe and enquiry_describe flip the typical verb_noun order, enquiry_fields is noun_noun, and submit_enquiry is verb_noun. The names are readable, but there is no consistent verb placement or structural pattern across the set.

Tool Count5/5

Five tools is well-scoped for a small site server with two purposes: performing and explaining a calculator, and supporting an enquiry submission workflow. Each tool earns its place without redundancy or excessive surface area.

Completeness5/5

The calculator side has both execution and documentation, while the enquiry side has process documentation, field schema, and the full two-step submission flow. There are no obvious dead ends or missing operations for the apparent domain of this server.

Resources