enquiry_fieldsEvery field of the Shop Sign Cost enquiry: key, label, type, whether required, help text and the allowed options where there are any. Pass answers to submit_enquiry keyed by field key.
| 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 provided, the description carries the full burden of explaining behavior. It transparently describes what information the tool exposes and how it relates to submit_enquiry. It does not explicitly state that it is a read-only retrieval operation, but the zero-parameter signature and the descriptive content make this reasonably clear.
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, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence earns its place. The first sentence enumerates the returned field metadata; the second gives actionable guidance for the related submission flow.
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 simple no-parameter tool with no output schema, the description sufficiently explains what will be returned and how the results should be used. It does not describe the exact response JSON shape, but the field enumeration gives an agent enough structure to proceed.
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 there is nothing for the description to explain about parameter usage. Per the baseline for no-parameter tools, this is fully adequate.
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 providing every field of the Shop Sign Cost enquiry, listing exactly what metadata is included: key, label, type, required flag, help text, and allowed options. It also distinguishes itself from submit_enquiry by explaining that answers should be passed to that sibling keyed by field key.
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?
The description gives clear context: use this tool to discover the enquiry's field structure and keys before submitting via submit_enquiry. It does not explicitly contrast with enquiry_describe, but the guidance about submit_enquiry makes the intended workflow 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: one explains the process, one returns the field schema, and one performs the submission. The two-step submit behavior is documented within submit_enquiry itself, so an agent should not confuse it with the informational tools.
The tools share the 'enquiry' root and use snake_case, but the pattern is inconsistent: two are noun-first (`enquiry_describe`, `enquiry_fields`) while the action is verb-first (`submit_enquiry`). This is readable but lacks a single predictable verb_noun convention.
Three tools is appropriate for the narrow enquiry lifecycle: a process explainer, a schema provider, and a submission action. Each tool justifies its existence and there is no bloat.
The surface fully covers the intended workflow: an agent can understand the process, fetch all required fields and options, and submit with the required consent and confirmation token. No additional operations are needed for the stated Shop Sign Cost enquiry purpose.