Toofi Dental Planning MCP

Get agent credit balance

get_agent_credit_balance

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get Toofi internal credit balance for an agent or clinic mandate.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`agent_id`	No	Calling agent identifier.
`agent_key`	No	Toofi agent API key. May also be supplied as X-Toofi-Agent-Key header.
`clinic_id`	No	Clinic identifier for mandate-scoped production execution.
`intent_id`	No	Root agent intent id.
`mandate_id`	No	Clinic or agent mandate id. Optional in public demo mode.
`request_id`	No	Idempotency and correlation id echoed in Toofi responses.
`principal_id`	No	Human or clinic principal on whose behalf the agent acts.
`session_token`	No	Alias for runtime_session_token.
`toofi_agent_key`	No	Alias for agent_key.
`runtime_session_token`	No	Toofi runtime actor token for service-user scoped execution. May also be supplied as x-toofi-session-token header.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ok`	No
`mode`	No
`status`	No
`endpoint`	No
`timestamp`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

Changed4 schema fields changedMay 13, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / agent_key

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Toofi agent API key. May also be supplied as X-Toofi-Agent-Key header.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / runtime_session_token

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Toofi runtime actor token for service-user scoped execution. May also be supplied as x-toofi-session-token header.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / session_token

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Alias for runtime_session_token.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / toofi_agent_key

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Alias for agent_key.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedMay 11, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds scoping context ('agent or clinic mandate') but no additional behavioral details such as authentication requirements or side effects. No contradiction with annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, focused sentence with no filler or redundancy. It front-loads the action and resource immediately, making it highly scannable.

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?

The tool has an output schema and comprehensive parameter documentation, so the description need not explain return values or parameter details. It captures the core purpose and scope, though a brief usage note would improve completeness; given the rich structured data, the current description is sufficient.

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 all 10 parameters individually described. The description adds no extra meaning to any parameter, but the schema already provides complete documentation, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses the verb 'Get' with a specific resource 'Toofi internal credit balance' and clearly scopes it to 'an agent or clinic mandate'. This distinguishes the tool from the sibling get_agent_billing_quote, which would provide a quote rather than a balance.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives like get_agent_billing_quote. There are no explicit when/when-not conditions or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the tool name.

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

All Toofi Dental Planning MCP tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Disambiguation3/5

Several tools have overlapping purposes, particularly example_en, example_pl, example_ru, example_sk, example_ua, example_uk, and get_example_result, which all return example PDFs. Also, example_ua and example_uk are explicitly aliases for the same Ukrainian example, creating direct ambiguity. Core clinical tools are distinct, but the example/demo cluster muddies the boundary.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a snake_case verb_noun pattern (e.g., list_patients, create_agent_checkout_session, generate_price_estimate), but a few deviations exist: example_en/pl/ru/sk/ua/uk lack a verb prefix, and get_example_result seems to duplicate example_en. The 'pano' abbreviation in start_pano_markup is also slightly inconsistent. Overall, the pattern is mostly predictable.

Tool Count2/5

With 32 tools, the count is too high for the apparent scope of dental planning. Many tools are redundant example/demo variants (e.g., 6 language-specific example tools plus get_example_result, and multiple demo getters/listers). This bloat suggests the tool set could be consolidated to a more focused 15-20 tools without losing core functionality.

Completeness3/5

The core workflow is covered: generating plans, retrieving patients/plans, pricing, and billing. However, there are notable gaps such as no update or delete operations for plans or patients, no create patient tool, and no way to modify pricing beyond import_price_csv. The demo tools partially compensate by offering sample data, but the production lifecycle is incomplete.

Resources

Need Help?