Skip to main content
Glama

Elicitly Pro

by ai.elicitly
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Check an elicitation's status

elicit_status
Read-only

Non-blocking status check for an elicitation you created: returns { status } — pending | submitted | declined | canceled | expired | consumed. Read-only and repeatable (never consumes the result); use elicit_await to block on a decision and elicit_result to fetch the outcome.

Input Schema

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

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
statusYesThe request's current lifecycle state.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 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": {
+    "status": {
+      "description": "The request's current lifecycle state.",
+      "enum": [
+        "pending",
+        "submitted",
+        "declined",
+        "canceled",
+        "expired",
+        "consumed"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "status"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark the tool as readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds important behavioral context: it is non-blocking, never consumes the result, and returns only the status, not the full outcome. This goes beyond the annotation by explaining the exact side-effect-free contract and the scope 'for an elicitation you created'.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The core purpose and status values are front-loaded, and the alternative-tool guidance is placed in the second sentence. Every clause earns its place.

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 description fully covers what an agent needs: the action, the exact return shape, the statuses, the non-consuming behavior, and the routing to sibling tools. An output schema exists, so return-value detail need not be repeated, and nothing essential is missing.

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?

The schema has 100% description coverage for its single required parameter, and the schema already explains that `elicitationId` is returned by the creating tool. The description adds no additional parameter-level semantics beyond reinforcing 'you created', so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('status check'), a clear resource ('elicitation'), and an explicit outcome: returns `{ status }` with all six possible status values. It also differentiates itself from sibling tools by naming `elicit_await` and `elicit_result` as alternatives for other behaviors, so an agent can distinguish it without opening schemas.

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 guidance on when to use this tool: it is non-blocking, read-only, and repeatable, and it says to use `elicit_await` to block and `elicit_result` to fetch the outcome. This directly tells the agent which sibling to select for adjacent use cases, leaving no ambiguity.

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
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources