Skip to main content
Glama

site

by uk.co.towingcapacitychecker

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

submit_enquiry

Submits an enquiry to Towing Capacity Checker — 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 local towbar fitter or towing specialist, 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 local towbar fitter or towing specialist, 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 fully communicates the tool's behavioral contract: two-step validation, summary and consent-line return, confirmation token reuse, email with a required click-through, and the exact consent wording. It also discloses that providers only see the enquiry after the person clicks the emailed link.

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?

Although lengthy, the description is efficiently structured with numbered steps and front-loaded disclaimers. Every sentence adds necessary operational detail, and the consent line is quoted exactly, reducing ambiguity for the agent.

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?

The two-step flow, required inputs, returned values, consent semantics, and post-submission email behavior are all fully explained. There is no output schema, so the description's coverage of expected returns and side effects is sufficient for correct invocation.

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?

The schema already describes all three parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds valuable workflow semantics beyond the schema: answers come from enquiry_fields, consent=true is mandatory in both steps, and confirmation is the token returned in step 1. This clarifies how the parameters relate across the two-step call sequence.

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 the tool 'Submits an enquiry to Towing Capacity Checker' and explicitly differentiates it from a purchase or guaranteed quote. The two-step nature and human-provider target are immediately evident, distinguishing it from the sibling checker_* tools.

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 provides clear step-by-step guidance on when and how to call the tool, including requiring consent=true and reusing the confirmation token in step 2. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives or state when not to use this tool, but the unique submission purpose and detailed flow make usage clear.

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
Disambiguation4/5

The checker_start, checker_answer, and checker_tree tools are closely related, but their roles are clearly distinguished: start gives the first question, answer traverses the guide, and tree provides the full structure for end-to-end reasoning. The enquiry tools are also distinct, though checker_start and checker_tree could be confused by an agent looking for the initial question.

Naming Consistency4/5

Names mostly follow a clear domain-prefix pattern: checker_* for the decision guide and enquiry_* for enquiry metadata. submit_enquiry is a minor deviation since it uses verb_noun instead of the enquiry_ prefix, but the overall naming is readable and predictable.

Tool Count5/5

Six tools is well-scoped for this server's purpose: three tools cover the towing capacity decision guide and three cover the enquiry submission flow. Each tool has a clear role with no redundant extras or overwhelming surface area.

Completeness5/5

The tool set fully covers the two core workflows: navigating and reasoning through the decision guide (start, answer, tree) and submitting a consent-based enquiry (describe, fields, submit). The two-step submission with confirmation token is handled within submit_enquiry, so there are no obvious dead ends or missing operations.

Resources