Skip to main content
Glama

site

by uk.co.transportstatementcost

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

submit_enquiry

Submits an enquiry to Transport Statement Cost — 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 relevant transport planning consultants, who'll quote 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 relevant transport planning consultants, who'll quote 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

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses the two-step statefulness, validation, confirmation token, email with click link, provider visibility delay, and the exact consent line. This is maximal transparency for a submission tool.

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?

Dense but every sentence earns its place; the critical 'NOT a purchase, NOT a guaranteed quote' is front-loaded, followed by numbered steps. Length is justified by the inherently complex two-step flow and exact consent text.

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?

Despite no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the full interaction contract: step-1 return values (summary, consent line, token), step-2 requirement, email workflow, and consent meaning. Nothing essential for calling this tool correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Though schema coverage is 100%, the description adds essential meaning: answers must be keyed by enquiry_fields, consent must be true and paired with exact consent text, and confirmation is the step-1 token used only after approval. This goes well beyond the schema 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?

States a specific action ('Submits an enquiry') and explicitly disambiguates from purchase/quote, and the two-step flow distinguishes it from the sibling enquiry_describe/enquiry_fields tools. The title reinforces the resource and steps.

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?

Provides explicit when and how: step 1 call with answers and consent=true to validate and get a token, then step 2 only after the person agrees. States it is NOT a purchase or guaranteed quote, and references enquiry_fields for answer keys, giving clear context.

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

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct aspect of the enquiry flow: describe explains the process, fields provides the schema, and submit performs the actual two-step submission. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them.

Naming Consistency3/5

Naming is mixed: two tools use an 'enquiry_' prefix with the verb at the end ('enquiry_describe') or no verb ('enquiry_fields'), while the third uses a verb-first pattern ('submit_enquiry'). The names are readable and share a common root, but the verb placement is inconsistent.

Tool Count5/5

Three tools is perfectly scoped for a single, narrow enquiry submission workflow. Each tool serves a necessary step without redundancy or unnecessary expansion.

Completeness5/5

The tool set covers the full enquiry lifecycle: learning about the process, getting field definitions, and submitting with the required two-step confirmation. No obvious operations are missing for the stated purpose.

Resources