Zovo Group Vote

Show vote results

show_vote_results

Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this when the user wants the current or final results of a vote made with create_group_vote. Takes the private organizer link (contains /m/). Returns the number of voters, totals per option, the leader or winner or a tie, and for ranked choice the round-by-round instant-runoff count. Does not change the vote. Does not work with the public link.

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": {
      "manage_url": "<manage_url>"
    },
    "name": "show_vote_results"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`manage_url`	Yes	The private organizer link of the vote, e.g. https://group-vote.zovo.one/m/AbC123.../XyZ789... (contains /m/).

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`note`	No
`tied`	Yes
`action`	Yes
`closed`	Yes
`counts`	Yes
`method`	Yes
`rounds`	Yes
`status`	Yes
`voters`	Yes
`winner`	Yes
`question`	Yes
`expires_at`	Yes
`manage_url`	Yes
`public_url`	Yes
`decided_by_tiebreak`	Yes
`hide_results_until_closed`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 8, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description reinforces this with 'Does not change the vote', so there is no contradiction. It adds real behavioral context: the required private organizer link with '/m/', and what the payload contains (voter counts, per-option totals, leader/winner/tie, RCV round-by-round). Return-shape detail partially overlaps the output schema, which keeps this from a 5.

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 trigger condition, then payload, then two short 'does not' guardrails. Every sentence carries information, though the results enumeration is a compact list that slightly duplicates the output schema.

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?

Annotations, a full schema description, and an output schema cover most structured detail, and the description still supplies the invocation gate (private link), the non-mutation guarantee, and the return contents. 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% and the schema already documents the manage_url format, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by framing it as the 'private organizer link' and explaining that the public link will not work, which tells the agent why the /m/ segment matters and what failure mode to avoid.

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?

Specific verb and resource ('show... results of a vote'), tied to the sibling that produces the vote (create_group_vote). An agent can distinguish it from create_group_vote and close_group_vote 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?

Explicit trigger condition ('when the user wants the current or final results'), a named upstream tool, and a clear exclusion ('Does not work with the public link'). The remaining sibling, close_group_vote, is implicitly separated by 'current or final' results.

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

All Zovo Group Vote 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?