Skip to main content
Glama

Sanovia — medici e professionisti sanitari in Italia

by app.sanovia
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Cerca professionisti / Search practitioners

search_doctors
Read-onlyIdempotent

Cerca medici e professionisti sanitari italiani iscritti a Sanovia per specialità e/o città. Elenca solo chi ha pubblicato sia il sito sia la pagina di prenotazione online. Non prenota: restituisce il link di prenotazione. / Search Italian doctors and health practitioners on Sanovia by specialty and/or city. Lists only practitioners who published both their website and their online booking page. Does not book; returns the booking link.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cityNoCittà della sede, es. «Bologna». / City of the practice.
limitNoMassimo risultati (default 10, max 20). / Max results.
specialtyNoSpecialità o professione, es. «cardiologo», «fisioterapista». / Specialty or profession.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
doctorsYes
truncatedYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "doctors": {
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "booking_url": {
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "cities": {
+            "items": {
+              "type": "string"
+            },
+            "type": "array"
+          },
+          "code": {
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "name": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "online_booking": {
+            "type": "boolean"
+          },
+          "practice_name": {
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "profession_types": {
+            "items": {
+              "type": "string"
+            },
+            "type": "array"
+          },
+          "site_url": {
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "specialty": {
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "code",
+          "name",
+          "specialty",
+          "practice_name",
+          "profession_types",
+          "online_booking",
+          "booking_url",
+          "site_url",
+          "cities"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "truncated": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "doctors",
+    "truncated"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
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, covering the safety profile. The description adds meaningful behavioral detail beyond annotations: it lists only practitioners who published both website and booking page, and it returns the booking link rather than performing a booking. This is valuable non-obvious behavior not available from structured metadata.

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?

The description is efficient and front-loaded: it opens with the resource and purpose, then states the filtering criteria, then clarifies the non-booking behavior. The bilingual duplication doubles length but is intentional for an Italian-context tool and contains no filler or tangential information.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a simple search tool with three fully documented parameters, a complete output schema, and safety annotations, the description covers all necessary usage context: what is searched, what filtering is applied, and what the tool returns (a booking link, not actual booking). No critical information is missing for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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%, with city, specialty, and limit all described inline. The description reinforces the city/specialty search dimensions but adds no parameter-level semantics beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate given full schema coverage.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Search Italian doctors and health practitioners on Sanovia', with explicit search dimensions of specialty and/or city. It also clarifies scope by stating it does not book but returns the booking link, clearly distinguishing it from the booking-related sibling tools.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description clearly conveys when to use it: when searching for practitioners by specialty and/or city and needing practitioners who have both a website and a booking page. It does not explicitly name alternatives like get_availability or get_doctor_profile, but the 'Does not book' clarification provides useful exclusions, and the search-vs-detail distinction with siblings is implied clearly enough.

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

All Sanovia — medici e professionisti sanitari in Italia toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources