med-lit-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

next_report

Idempotent

Retrieves portions of a medical literature review report's underlying content—question, search and screening facts, and included article evidence—to support audit or synthesis.

Instructions

Get what the report is written from: the question, the search and screening facts, and the included articles' evidence, in portions (repeat while remaining > 0). Reads only (may create the project database). Rules: guide("report").

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": "next_report"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`offset`	No	From the previous call's `next`
`run_id`	Yes	Run ID from start_search

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv0.3.0Oct 29, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

The annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, but the description says 'Reads only' while also admitting it may create the project database. That is a direct contradiction of the annotation's read-only status, and the description does not clearly reconcile the mutation side effect with the claimed read-only behavior.

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?

The description is short but awkwardly front-loaded ('Get what the report is written from') and contains an internal inconsistency between 'Reads only' and 'may create the project database.' It conveys the key pagination rule, but the structure could be clearer.

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

Completeness3/5

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

An output schema exists and the input schema is fully documented, reducing the description's burden. Still, the ambiguous read-only claim, vague guide reference, and missing when-to-use guidance leave the definition only minimally complete for a paginated report-retrieval tool.

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 coverage is 100%, and the schema itself explains offset as coming from the previous call's `next` and run_id as coming from start_search. The description adds pagination behavior ('in portions') but does not add parameter-specific meaning 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.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description gives a specific retrieval purpose and enumerates the report inputs it returns: question, search/screening facts, and included-article evidence. It distinguishes the tool from report-writing siblings like record_report by framing it as fetching the source material, though the phrasing 'what the report is written from' is slightly abstract.

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?

It provides a pagination rule ('repeat while remaining > 0') and points to guide("report") for rules, which is useful. However, it does not explain when to call this versus alternatives such as record_report, project_settings, or research_next, nor does it state prerequisites beyond the run_id schema.

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