ImmunoGraph MCP

compute_consensus_batch

Read-onlyIdempotent

Compute weighted consensus separately for multiple pre-assembled candidate groups in one call, returning one result per group without pooling observations.

Instructions

Compute weighted consensus separately for multiple candidate groups in one call. Use instead of repeated compute_consensus calls when groups are already assembled; groups are not pooled together. Returns one result per supplied group, based only on its input observations.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`runId`	Yes	Caller-chosen identifier linking this call to one research run.
`groups`	Yes	Independent candidate groups, each with its own observations and weights.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ok`	Yes	Whether execution completed successfully.
`data`	No	Tool-specific result fields on success.
`meta`	Yes	Run identifiers, timings, and input/output hashes.
`error`	No	Structured failure on unsuccessful execution.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed6 schema fields changedv0.2.1Oct 31, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / groups / description

Added value: +"Independent candidate groups, each with its own observations and weights."

addedInput schema / properties / groups / items / properties / configuredRequiredWeight / description
```
Added value: +"Total weight of evidence methods required by the consensus profile."
```
addedInput schema / properties / groups / items / properties / groupKey / description
```
Added value: +"Stable identifier for one independent consensus group."
```
addedInput schema / properties / groups / items / properties / observations / description
```
Added value: +"Caller-supplied evidence observations; this tool does not fetch them."
```

addedInput schema / properties / runId / description

Added value: +"Caller-chosen identifier linking this call to one research run."

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "additionalProperties": {},
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "additionalProperties": {},
+      "description": "Tool-specific result fields on success.",
+      "properties": {},
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "error": {
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "description": "Structured failure on unsuccessful execution.",
+      "properties": {
+        "category": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "code": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "details": {
+          "additionalProperties": {},
+          "properties": {},
+          "type": "object"
+        },
+        "message": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "retryable": {
+          "type": "boolean"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "code",
+        "category",
+        "message",
+        "retryable"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "meta": {
+      "additionalProperties": {},
+      "description": "Run identifiers, timings, and input/output hashes.",
+      "properties": {
+        "completedAt": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "durationMs": {
+          "type": "number"
+        },
+        "inputHash": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "outputHash": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "requestId": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "runId": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "startedAt": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "toolName": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "toolVersion": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "requestId",
+        "runId",
+        "toolName",
+        "toolVersion",
+        "startedAt",
+        "inputHash"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "ok": {
+      "description": "Whether execution completed successfully.",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "ok",
+    "meta"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv0.2.0Oct 31, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, and an output schema exists, so the safety and return-shape burden is largely carried elsewhere. The description still adds real behavioral context: independence of per-group computation and a one-result-per-group contract. It stops short of mentioning failure behavior when required weight is unmet or the ordering of returned results.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with what it does, then when to use it, then the return contract. No restatement of the name and no filler.

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?

With annotations, a full-coverage input schema, and an output schema, the description covers what an agent needs to select and call the tool. Minor omissions remain, e.g. how a group whose observations fail the configured weight requirement is reported, but nothing essential to invocation 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 every nested parameter (runId, groupKey, observations, configuredRequiredWeight) is documented in the schema itself. The description's "groups are not pooled" line adds a useful semantic nuance about the groups array but no format or constraint detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ("Compute weighted consensus") plus the key scope modifier: separately, for multiple candidate groups, in one call. It explicitly contrasts itself with the sibling compute_consensus, so an agent can distinguish the two without opening either 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?

Names the alternative (repeated compute_consensus calls) and the condition that selects this tool (groups are already assembled). It also rules out an incorrect mental model by stating groups are not pooled together, which is exactly the inference an agent would otherwise make.

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

Deploy Server