Skip to main content
Glama
u9401066

pubmed-search-mcp

by u9401066
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

get_pipeline_history

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve execution history for a saved pipeline, showing past run dates, article counts, and new or removed articles compared to previous runs.

Instructions

Get execution history for a saved pipeline.

Shows past execution results with diff analysis: which articles are new compared to the previous run.

Args: name: Name of the saved pipeline. limit: Maximum number of history entries to return (default: 5).

Returns: Execution history with date, article count, new/removed articles, status.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
limitNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed7 schema fields changedv0.7.2
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit / maximum
      Added value: +100
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit / minimum
      Added value: +1
    • addedInput schema / properties / name / maxLength
      Added value: +64
    • addedInput schema / properties / name / minLength
      Added value: +1
    • addedInput schema / properties / name / pattern
      Added value: +"^[a-z0-9](?:[a-z0-9_-]{0,63})$"
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "result": {
-      "title": "Result",
-      "type": "string"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "result"
-  ],
-  "title": "get_pipeline_historyOutput",
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. First observedv0.5.16

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond that by disclosing the return shape: per-entry date, article count, new/removed articles, and status. It doesn't mention behavior for a nonexistent pipeline name, but that is a minor gap.

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?

Front-loaded purpose sentence followed by a short diff-analysis clarification, then Args/Returns blocks. The Args section mostly restates schema facts, which is minor redundancy, but nothing is padded or confusing.

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 no output schema and 0% schema description coverage, the description supplies both parameter meaning and return-field detail, giving an agent enough to invoke and interpret the call. Only edge-case behavior (unknown pipeline name) is unaddressed.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the burden and largely does: it explains 'name' as the saved pipeline's name and 'limit' as the maximum number of history entries with default 5. It omits the name pattern/max-length constraint and the limit's 1-100 range, which the schema does encode, so it is not fully compensating.

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+resource ('Get execution history for a saved pipeline') and adds the distinguishing detail that it returns diff analysis of new articles versus the previous run. It does not explicitly name how it differs from list_pipelines or load_pipeline, so it falls short of the 5 bar for sibling differentiation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus alternatives like list_pipelines, load_pipeline, or read_session. The description describes the content returned but never states a use context, prerequisite (e.g. the pipeline must already exist), or exclusion.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools