Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Elicitly Pro

by ai.elicitly
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Fetch a decided elicitation's outcome

elicit_result
Idempotent

Fetch the outcome of a decided request (poll elicit_status or block on elicit_await first — this errors while the request is still pending, after it expires undecided, or if it was canceled via elicit_cancel; repeatable reads are fine afterward). Returns { status: 'consumed', decision, context, formSubmission } for every tool. formSubmission is what the review form submitted, keyed by field name: the form fields for elicit_approval (null in json mode); { selectedIds } for elicit_selection; only the fields the reviewer included for elicit_proposal. Null on decline.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
elicitationIdYesThe `elicitationId` returned by the creating tool (elicit_approval, elicit_selection, or elicit_proposal).

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
statusYesThe outcome has been read at least once.
contextYesThe caller's original `context`, echoed verbatim (null if none was supplied).
decisionYesThe reviewer's choice: submitted = approved/filled in, declined = explicit no.
formSubmissionYesWhat the review form submitted, keyed by field name: elicit_approval's form fields (null in json mode), { selectedIds } for elicit_selection, the included fields for elicit_proposal. Null on decline.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / additionalProperties
      Previous value: -falseNew value: +{}
  2. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedOutput schema / properties / formSubmission / description
      Previous value: -"The reviewer-filled field values keyed by requestedSchema property name; null in json mode or on decline."New value: +"What the review form submitted, keyed by field name: elicit_approval's form fields (null in json mode), { selectedIds } for elicit_selection, the included fields for elicit_proposal. Null on decline."
    • removedOutput schema / properties / selectedIds
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "elicit_selection only, on submit: the chosen option ids.",
-  "items": {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  "type": "array"
-}
    • removedOutput schema / properties / values
      Removed value: -{
-  "additionalProperties": {},
-  "description": "elicit_proposal only, on submit: the proposed values for just the fields the reviewer included.",
-  "propertyNames": {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  "type": "object"
-}
  3. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / elicitationId / description
      Added value: +"The `elicitationId` returned by the creating tool (elicit_approval, elicit_selection, or elicit_proposal)."
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "context": {
+      "description": "The caller's original `context`, echoed verbatim (null if none was supplied)."
+    },
+    "decision": {
+      "description": "The reviewer's choice: submitted = approved/filled in, declined = explicit no.",
+      "enum": [
+        "submitted",
+        "declined"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "formSubmission": {
+      "description": "The reviewer-filled field values keyed by requestedSchema property name; null in json mode or on decline."
+    },
+    "selectedIds": {
+      "description": "elicit_selection only, on submit: the chosen option ids.",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "const": "consumed",
+      "description": "The outcome has been read at least once.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "values": {
+      "additionalProperties": {},
+      "description": "elicit_proposal only, on submit: the proposed values for just the fields the reviewer included.",
+      "propertyNames": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "status",
+    "decision",
+    "context",
+    "formSubmission"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  4. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false), and the description goes further by disclosing lifecycle error states (pending, expired, canceled) and read-repeatability semantics. It also explains how the returned formSubmission varies by the originating tool, which no annotation conveys.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with purpose, then preconditions, then return shape — a sensible order with no filler sentences. The long parentheticals make it dense to read, but every clause carries actionable information rather than repetition.

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?

An output schema exists, yet the description still usefully explains the per-tool variation in formSubmission, which the schema alone would not make obvious. Prerequisites, failure modes, and return shape are all covered for this single-parameter tool.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100% and the single parameter's provenance is already documented in the schema ('returned by the creating tool'). The description's parenthetical listing of calling tools adds marginal reinforcement but no new syntax or format detail, so baseline 3 applies.

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 verb+resource ('fetch the outcome of a decided request') and immediately distinguishes itself from siblings by naming elicit_status and elicit_await as the prerequisite steps. An agent can tell it apart from elicit_cancel and the creating tools without opening any schema.

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?

Explicitly states the required ordering ('poll elicit_status or block on elicit_await first') and the three conditions under which it fails: still pending, expired undecided, or canceled via elicit_cancel. It also clarifies that repeat reads are permitted, leaving nothing to inference.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Elicitly Pro toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources