Get a summary of all votes cast in the current Covidence screening session, with an option to clear the log after viewing. Use this to track screening progress and decisions.
Return a summary of all votes cast in the current session.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| clear | No | If true, clears the log after returning it |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of disclosing side effects. It presents a read-only style 'Return' behavior but does not disclose that setting clear=true clears the log after returning it; that only appears in the schema. This is a significant transparency gap, though not a contradiction.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It directly states the action and the object, making it easy to scan and quick to parse.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple one-parameter tool, the description plus the fully documented schema is mostly complete: the purpose is clear and the clear side effect is described in the schema. The main gap is the lack of any detail about the returned summary's shape, but 'summary' is adequate for a basic retrieval tool.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%: the sole parameter, clear, is fully documented in the schema with 'If true, clears the log after returning it.' The description adds no parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb ('Return') and a specific resource ('summary of all votes cast in the current session'). This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like covidence_log_vote or covidence_screen.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies this tool is for retrieving a session vote summary, but it gives no explicit guidance about when to use it versus alternatives like covidence_log_vote, nor does it mention prerequisites such as being logged in. Usage context is inferable but not explicitly stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.