Lenz Fact-Check

Resolve a multi-claim interrupt

select_claims

Resolve a needs_input verification by choosing which claim(s) to run.

When `verify_claim` or `get_verification` returns ``status: needs_input``
with reason ``multi_claim``, call this with
that ``task_id`` and a ``claims`` list of one or more of the offered claim
texts, exactly as listed. Each selected claim starts its own deep
verification. With ONE claim selected this waits for the check and
returns its result like `get_verification` (with the new ``task_id``);
with several it returns one ``task_id`` per claim to pass to
`get_verification`.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`claims`	Yes	One or more of the exact claim texts offered by get_verification (its `claims`). Each selected claim starts its own deep verification.
`task_id`	Yes	The task_id of the needs_input verification being resolved (from the get_verification response).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only say readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true. The description goes well beyond that by disclosing what actually happens: each claim starts its own deep verification, one claim blocks and returns a result like get_verification with a new task_id, several return one task_id per claim.

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?

Well front-loaded: purpose first, trigger condition second, outcome semantics last. Slightly heavy on backtick formatting and a long final clause, but every sentence carries actionable 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?

For a two-parameter but behaviorally intricate tool, it covers the trigger, valid inputs, and the divergent single- vs multi-claim return behavior. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and the description largely restates the schema's own wording ('exactly as listed', 'one or more of the offered claim texts'). It reinforces the cardinality and exact-text constraint but adds little that the schema does not already carry.

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 and resource ('Resolve a needs_input verification by choosing which claim(s) to run') and clearly distinguishes itself from verify_claim and get_verification, which are named as the producers of the triggering state.

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?

Gives an explicit trigger condition: when verify_claim or get_verification returns status: needs_input with reason multi_claim, call this with that task_id. It also names the exact source of the claims list, leaving nothing to inference.

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

All Lenz Fact-Check 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.