Skip to main content
Glama

site

by uk.leavetracker

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

submit_enquiry

Submits an enquiry to Leave Tracker — 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 leave and absence software suppliers, 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 leave and absence software suppliers, 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

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 the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains the two-step validation/submission flow, the email link the person must click before providers see anything, and the exact consent wording. It also explicitly disclaims purchase and guaranteed quote behavior.

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?

The description is long but densely informative, organized by Step 1 and Step 2. Every sentence earns its place, and key warnings are front-loaded ('NOT a purchase, NOT a guaranteed quote').

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 lacking an output schema and annotations, the description tells the agent what to expect (summary, consent line, confirmation token), what to do with it, and the required next action. It also covers the consent requirement and privacy-critical email-link step, making it complete for a two-step submission tool.

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?

Although schema coverage is already 100%, the description adds meaning beyond the schema: answers are keyed by field key from enquiry_fields, consent has the exact consent text, and confirmation is the token returned from step 1 and is only used after the person approves.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Submits an enquiry to Leave Tracker.' It immediately distinguishes the tool from a purchase or guaranteed quote, and the two-step workflow clearly separates it from the sibling calculator/describe tools.

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?

The description gives explicit step-by-step usage: call first with answers and consent=true, show the summary, and only call again with the confirmation token if the person agrees. It also tells the agent when not to proceed and what consent means.

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

A4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Each tool targets a distinct aspect: running the calculator, describing calculator inputs/outputs, explaining the enquiry flow, listing enquiry fields, and submitting an enquiry. The only mild ambiguity is between the two '_describe' tools, but their descriptions clearly separate calculator metadata from enquiry process/schema.

Naming Consistency3/5

The names are readable and consistently lowercase snake_case, but they mix conventions: 'calculate' and 'submit_enquiry' put the action first, while 'calculator_describe' and 'enquiry_describe' put the noun first with a verb suffix, and 'enquiry_fields' has no verb. A consistent verb_noun pattern would improve predictability.

Tool Count5/5

Five tools is well-scoped for this server's two related purposes: the leave calculator and the enquiry submission flow. Each tool earns its place, including the metadata and instruction tools that prevent misuse.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface fully covers the apparent domain: calculate provides the calculation, calculator_describe explains its contract, and enquiry_fields/enquiry_describe/submit_enquiry cover the two-step consent and submission lifecycle. There are no obvious dead ends or missing operations.

Resources