Venture Insights Concept Diagnostic

Check Concept Diagnostic status

check_diagnostic_status

Read-only

Poll the progress of a Concept Diagnostic intake started with start_free_diagnostic. Pass the intake_id and token that call returned. Statuses: pending_confirmation (founder hasn't clicked the emailed link yet — nothing is generated), generating (founder confirmed; the study is being researched and written), ready (done — includes a tokenized report link to share ONLY with the founder), on_file (the founder already had a diagnostic on file — nothing new was generated and no link is shared here; terminal, stop polling), expired (the intake lapsed; start a fresh one). Poll every 30-60 seconds at most.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`token`	Yes	The read-only status token returned by start_free_diagnostic (field: status_token).
`intake_id`	Yes	The intake_id returned by start_free_diagnostic.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`status`	No	pending_confirmation \| generating \| ready \| on_file \| expired.
`message`	No
`view_url`	No	Tokenized report link — present only when status is 'ready'.

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. Description adds detailed status transitions and polling behavior, providing full transparency beyond annotations.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Single well-structured paragraph with no fluff. Lists statuses with explanations and polling frequency efficiently.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values are covered. Description covers purpose, parameters, statuses, and polling behavior completely.

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 covers both parameters with 100% description. Description adds context linking parameters to start_free_diagnostic return values, providing extra meaning beyond schema.

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?

The description clearly states it polls the progress of a Concept Diagnostic intake, referencing start_free_diagnostic and distinguishing from sibling tools like start_free_diagnostic, open_diagnostic_intake, and describe_services.

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?

Explicitly instructs to pass intake_id and token from start_free_diagnostic and lists statuses with corresponding actions. Also suggests polling frequency (every 30-60 seconds), but does not explicitly state when not to use the tool.

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

All Venture Insights Concept Diagnostic tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Disambiguation3/5

The tools have distinct purposes, but open_diagnostic_intake and start_free_diagnostic overlap in initiating the diagnostic. open_diagnostic_intake presents a form and 'starts the diagnostic on submit', while start_free_diagnostic directly sends a confirmation email, making it ambiguous which to call first. Descriptions help, but an agent could misselect.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (check_diagnostic_status, describe_services, open_diagnostic_intake, start_free_diagnostic). No deviations or mixed conventions.

Tool Count5/5

Four tools is a well-scoped number for the free diagnostic workflow. Each tool serves a necessary step: describe, intake, start, and poll status. No redundancy or missing steps for the core flow.

Completeness3/5

The set covers the free diagnostic flow (describe, intake, start, status) but omits any tools for the paid services mentioned in describe_services. Also, the relationship between open_diagnostic_intake and start_free_diagnostic is unclear, creating a potential gap in the flow.

Resources

Need Help?