enquiry_describeRead first. States plainly what submit_enquiry does on Three Phase Cost: it starts an enquiry with human providers who quote directly. Nothing is bought, ordered or paid; no quote is guaranteed; it is free. Also returns who receives the details, the consent wording, and how the person confirms.
| 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, the description carries the behavioral burden. It clearly discloses that no purchase, order, or payment occurs, that quotes are not guaranteed, that the service is free, and that it returns recipient, consent, and confirmation details. It does not explicitly state that the describe call itself has no side effects, but that is strongly implied by 'States plainly.'
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?
Three short sentences front-load the key instruction ('Read first'), state the core behavior, list exclusions, and summarize the returned information. Every sentence earns its place.
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 zero-parameter informational tool without an output schema, the description covers purpose, behavioral constraints, and returned content. It explicitly names what is returned, so nothing essential is missing for tool selection or invocation.
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 input schema is empty and schema description coverage is 100%, so there are no parameters to explain. The description correctly focuses on behavior and output rather than parameters.
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 names a specific resource ('what submit_enquiry does on Three Phase Cost') and a specific verb ('States plainly'), and details the content returned. It also differentiates the tool from its siblings: it describes the enquiry flow rather than submitting it or listing fields.
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?
'Read first' explicitly positions this as the tool to consult before acting, and the description names submit_enquiry as the subject. It gives clear context but does not explicitly state when to avoid it or compare with enquiry_fields.
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: enquiry_describe explains the overall process and consent, enquiry_fields provides the exact schema, and submit_enquiry performs the two-step submission. There is no functional overlap between them.
All names are lowercase snake_case, but the pattern is mixed: enquiry_describe and enquiry_fields are enquiry-first, while submit_enquiry is verb-first. The names are still readable, but the set is not consistently verb_noun.
Three tools is appropriate for the narrow scope of submitting an enquiry: describe the process, get the fields, submit. Each tool earns its place and none are redundant.
The server covers the full enquiry submission flow: explaining the process, fetching the required field definitions, and performing the validated two-step submission with consent and confirmation token. No obvious gaps exist for the stated purpose.