enquiry_fieldsEvery field of the Varicose Vein Treatment 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 clearly discloses what the tool returns: the complete field structure of the enquiry, including types, required status, help text, and options. It does not explicitly state that this is a read-only operation, but the content strongly implies it.
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 two tight sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the core output content and then adds a practical integration instruction, making it both efficient and easy to parse.
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?
Given zero parameters and no output schema, the description fully compensates by enumerating exactly what fields the agent will receive and how to use them downstream. Nothing essential is missing for selecting or invoking this tool.
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 the baseline is 4. The description adds useful context by explaining that field keys are the linkage to submit_enquiry, but there are no parameter semantics to elaborate on.
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 states the tool's purpose: it returns every field of a specific enquiry with key, label, type, required flag, help text, and allowed options. This is specific and actionable, and it implicitly distinguishes itself from submit_enquiry by positioning itself as the source of field keys.
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 provides clear usage context: the returned field keys should be used to pass answers to submit_enquiry. It does not explicitly compare against enquiry_describe or state when not to use this tool, so it stops short of a full 5.
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 overall enquiry behavior, one provides field definitions, and one handles submission with confirmation. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them.
All names are lowercase snake_case and share the term 'enquiry', but the pattern is mixed: 'enquiry_describe' and 'enquiry_fields' put the noun first, while 'submit_enquiry' puts the verb first. The set is readable but not uniformly verb_noun.
Three tools is well-scoped for a single-purpose enquiry server. Each tool covers a necessary step in the workflow without redundancy or unnecessary additions.
The tool surface covers the full enquiry lifecycle: understand what happens, inspect the required fields and options, and submit with a two-step confirmation. No critical operation is missing for this narrow domain.