The Cure Protocol

get_world_trial

Read-only

USE WHEN you already have a canonicalId (from search_world_trials or find_trial_registrations) and need the COMPLETE record: all normalized fields plus every source record behind it — registry, source id, source URL, retrieval timestamp and payload checksum. Set includeRaw=true to get the untouched registry payload we stored (after contact-field redaction) so you can verify a specific claim field-by-field; that is the strongest evidence available here. NEXT: find_trial_registrations to see whether the same real-world trial is registered elsewhere; get_registry_sources for the licence and sync state of the registry it came from.

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": {
      "canonicalId": "<canonicalId>"
    },
    "name": "get_world_trial"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`includeRaw`	No	Include the full raw registry payloads. Large.
`canonicalId`	Yes	Canonical trial id, e.g. NCT07093359 or ISRCTN13533177.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	No	The answer. Shape depends on the tool; describe_tool documents it.
`_meta`	No	source, generatedAt, sources (per-source lastSyncedAt and ageHours), rateLimit, disclaimer.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 28, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": {},
+  "properties": {
+    "_meta": {
+      "additionalProperties": {},
+      "description": "source, generatedAt, sources (per-source lastSyncedAt and ageHours), rateLimit, disclaimer.",
+      "propertyNames": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "data": {
+      "description": "The answer. Shape depends on the tool; describe_tool documents it."
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedOct 24, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / canonicalId / maxLength
```
Added value: +20000
```
First observedOct 18, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond readOnlyHint/openWorldHint, it discloses non-obvious behavior: includeRaw returns the untouched stored payload only after contact-field redaction, and it characterizes that as the strongest available evidence. That redaction caveat is exactly the kind of detail an agent cannot infer from annotations or schema.

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 the triggering condition and organized into use / includeRaw / NEXT blocks, with no filler sentences. Slightly dense with stacked parentheticals and caps emphasis, but each clause carries distinct information.

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 so return values needn't be spelled out, yet the description still conveys the shape of the result (normalized fields + source records). Precondition, option semantics, and follow-on tools are all covered — nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is missing.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description earns above that by explaining what includeRaw is actually for (field-by-field claim verification) and its redaction caveat, plus noting canonicalId provenance. It stops short of the top mark because canonicalId's own format/failure semantics are left entirely to the schema example.

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 COMPLETE trial record for a canonicalId) and enumerates exactly what completeness means: normalized fields plus registry, source id, source URL, retrieval timestamp and payload checksum. It also names the two sibling tools that produce a canonicalId (search_world_trials, find_trial_registrations), so an agent can distinguish it from them 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?

Opens with an explicit precondition ('USE WHEN you already have a canonicalId') and attributes where that id comes from. It also gives a follow-on routing section ('NEXT: find_trial_registrations ... get_registry_sources'), covering both entry and continuation paths.

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

All The Cure Protocol 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?