med-lit-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

next_synthesis

DestructiveIdempotent

Fetch the next entity needing a wiki page written or updated, including supporting evidence, and repeat until the page is saved.

Instructions

Get the next entity whose wiki page needs writing or updating, with its evidence; it repeats until record_synthesis saves it. Rules: guide("synthesis").

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`run_id`	No	Only entities from this run's articles
`project`	No	Project name from list_projects; may be omitted when only one project exists
`min_sources`	No	One-off override of the project's wiki.min_sources

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed6 schema fields changedv0.1.5Oct 1, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / min_sources / anyOf
```
Added value: +[
+  {
+    "maximum": 10,
+    "minimum": 1,
+    "type": "integer"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
```
- changedInput schema / properties / min_sources / default
```
Previous value: -2New value: +null
```
- changedInput schema / properties / min_sources / description
```
Previous value: -"Entities need at least this many source articles"New value: +"One-off override of the project's wiki.min_sources"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / min_sources / maximum
```
Removed value: -10
```
- removedInput schema / properties / min_sources / minimum
```
Removed value: -1
```
- removedInput schema / properties / min_sources / type
```
Removed value: -"integer"
```
First observedv0.1.1Sep 29, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, yet the description only says 'Get' and never explains what state is consumed or destroyed, nor what happens if the loop is abandoned without record_synthesis. The queue-advance semantics are only hinted at by 'it repeats until...', leaving the destructive/idempotent profile unexplained.

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?

Two tight sentences with the purpose front-loaded and the loop/terminator condition immediately after; no filler. The trailing 'Rules: guide("synthesis")' is a pointer rather than a wasted sentence, though it shifts essential content elsewhere.

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, so return values need not be described, and the schema fully covers the three parameters. What is missing is the behavior of a destructive, idempotent queue-advancing getter in a 35-tool pipeline, and the operating rules are outsourced to guide().

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%, so run_id, project, and min_sources are already documented in the schema (including the run_id pattern and the wiki.min_sources override). The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, 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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Get the next entity whose wiki page needs writing or updating, with its evidence.' That is materially more informative than the name alone and delimits the synthesis stage. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the sibling next_wiki_article or explain the entity-vs-article split.

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 repeats until record_synthesis saves it' implies the iteration loop and names the terminating sibling, which is useful workflow context. But there is no when-not guidance, no statement about prerequisites (run_id/project), and the actual rules are deferred entirely to guide("synthesis") rather than stated.

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