Summer

This connector has been deprecated

This was a duplicate manual listing. Use Summer’s official listing, imported from the official MCP Registry. Summer’s MCP server remains active at https://api.gosummer.ai/mcp. Setup and documentation: https://gosummer.ai/docs/mcp-clients.

Ask Summer a question about the case, such as why it chose a plan or what it found

summer_cases_chat_ask

Destructive

Ask Summer a question about the case, such as why it chose a plan or what it found. Summer reopens its last run on the case, with what it already read, and answers in the case chat. Read-only: it publishes no plan and makes no changes. One question at a time per case. Read cases.chat.list for the answer, which usually takes a minute or two. To change the plan, use investigations.request.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "company": "<company>",
      "environment": "<environment>",
      "case": "<case>",
      "question": "<question>"
    },
    "name": "summer_cases_chat_ask"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`case`	Yes
`company`	Yes	Summer company ID
`question`	Yes
`environment`	Yes	Environment that owns the resource
`idempotency_key`	No	Reuse the same key when retrying the same change

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 26, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

The description asserts 'Read-only: it publishes no plan and makes no changes', while the annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true. An agent reading the prose would believe this is a safe read, which is the opposite of the declared side-effect profile.

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?

The definition is front-loaded with the purpose, then the mechanism, then the read-only claim, then polling instructions and the sibling redirect. Every sentence carries information, though the read-only claim is both wrong and repeated in spirit twice.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 5-parameter tool with no output schema, the description usefully explains where the answer surfaces (cases.chat.list) and the expected latency. However, its inaccurate side-effect claim leaves the agent without a trustworthy picture of what the call actually does to state, which is central to completeness here.

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 60%, a middle ground where the description neither carries the full burden nor is redundant. The prose only lightly touches parameters ('per case', 'case chat') and says nothing about the question format or the idempotency_key's retry semantics.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource ('Ask Summer a question about the case') and gives concrete example intents ('why it chose a plan or what it found'). It also distinguishes itself from the plan-changing sibling, so an agent can tell what this tool is for without opening the schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives an explicit alternative ('To change the plan, use investigations.request'), a usage constraint ('One question at a time per case'), and a follow-up path ('Read cases.chat.list for the answer, which usually takes a minute or two'). It lacks explicit when-not-to-use conditions beyond the plan-change case, but the routing guidance is clear.

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

All Summer tools Inspect

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

Need Help?