Orinyx

get_next_exam_case

Not for clinical use. Orinyx checks medication claims against cited FDA label text for testing and evaluation only. Do not use its results to diagnose, treat, prescribe or make patient care decisions. Use synthetic test data only. Sitting an exam: get the next unanswered case (a transcript or a patient message with patient context, or an encounter note with its date of service) and how to answer it: medication claims with the claim shapes the checker reads, the reply text, or ICD-10-CM diagnosis codes. Orinyx starts timing the case when it is first served.

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": {
      "run_id": "<run_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_next_exam_case"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`run_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 3, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose a critical non-obvious side effect: the service starts timing the case as soon as it is served, so repeated calls have consequences. It also states the scope limitation ('not for clinical use', 'synthetic test data only'). It does not state whether the run_id must be active, what happens when no unanswered cases remain, or any auth requirements.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

Three of the opening sentences are compliance disclaimers, so the actual tool behavior is not front-loaded, and the purpose sentence is wrapped and fragmented across lines. The disclaimers are likely mandated, but the functional content could lead or be separated more cleanly.

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

Completeness4/5

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

The tool is simple (one integer parameter) and an output schema exists, so return values need no prose explanation; the description nevertheless sketches case contents helpfully. The only substantive omission is any explanation of run_id and of the exhausted-cases terminal state.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% and the sole required parameter, run_id, is never mentioned in the description. The agent gets no signal about where run_id comes from (presumably start_a_test) or whether it scopes retrieval to a specific exam run. This is the largest gap in the definition.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: 'get the next unanswered case' during an exam, and enumerates what the case contains (transcript/patient message, or encounter note with date of service) plus the answerable item types. An agent can distinguish this from get_exam_cases (listing) and submit_exam_answers (submission), though no sibling is named explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The 'Sitting an exam' framing implies the usage context and 'next unanswered case' implies progression, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use statement and no routing to the obvious alternative (get_exam_cases, start_a_test). An agent must infer that this is the in-exam iteration call rather than the listing call.

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

All Orinyx 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.