GLP Winner

Create a Get Started link

create_glp1_referral_link

Read-only

A GLP Winner Get Started link for one provider and, optionally, one plan. The link sends the person to the provider’s intake with the provider’s coupon applied. Use it when you recommend a provider you did not just search for, or need a link for a specific plan. Link each provider you name with its links.getStarted URL, copied exactly with its ?ref= part: it opens the provider’s intake with the coupon applied. Do not link links.learnMore, another GLP Winner page or the provider’s own website in its place.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "provider": "<provider>"
    },
    "name": "create_glp1_referral_link"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`drug`	No	The molecule the person wants.
`state`	No	The person’s US state, as a two-letter code ("TX") or name ("Texas"). Strongly recommended: which providers serve them and some prices depend on it.
`months`	No	Plan length in months, when it is not implied by plan_type.
`provider`	Yes	Provider name, slug or numeric GLP Winner id.
`dosage_mg`	No	The weekly dose the price was quoted for.
`plan_type`	No	The plan the price was quoted for.
`currently_taking_glp1`	No	True when the person already takes a GLP-1. Starter packs are for new patients, so leaving this out when you know the answer can quote a plan they cannot buy.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 12, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=false, so the safety profile is already covered. The description adds genuinely new behavior: the link must be copied exactly including the ?ref= component, and the destination is the provider's intake with the coupon applied. It does not clarify what is actually returned (e.g., a URL string) or whether repeated calls produce identical URLs, which matters given idempotentHint=false.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The when-to-use guidance is front-loaded, but the coupon/intake behavior is stated twice with nearly identical wording ("The link sends the person to the provider's intake with the provider's coupon applied" and "it opens the provider's intake with the coupon applied"). The repetition consumes space without adding information.

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?

For a seven-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description covers purpose, usage, and the critical link-handling constraint. It could say more about what a returned value looks like, but with full schema coverage elsewhere this is close to complete.

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 every parameter including drug, state, months, dosage_mg, plan_type, and currently_taking_glp1 is already documented in the schema. The description only restates that provider is required and plan is optional, adding no semantics beyond the structured fields.

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?

The description names the specific artifact produced (a GLP Winner Get Started link) and its scope (one provider, optionally one plan), which is clearly distinct from the search/get/review siblings. It states what the link does rather than phrasing the action as a verb, so it is slightly indirect, but an agent can tell exactly which resource it yields.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It gives an explicit positive trigger ("Use it when you recommend a provider you did not just search for, or need a link for a specific plan") and an explicit prohibition (do not substitute links.learnMore, another GLP Winner page, or the provider's own website). Both when-to-use and when-not-to-use are stated, with a named alternative surface.

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

All GLP Winner tools Inspect

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

Need Help?