Hosted MCP app for guided anxiety, depression, and well-being self-checks.
Scored across 1 tool
With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusion or overlap. The single tool's purpose is clearly defined, and its behavior is explicit in the description.
With a single tool, there is no naming pattern to be inconsistent. The name 'mental-health-get-test' is understandable and follows a clear intent, even if slightly awkward.
The server has only one tool, which is at the low end of the acceptable range. The tool is useful but the overall capability feels minimal, bordering on thin for a server dedicated to 'Well-Being Check'.
The tool covers the primary action of loading an assessment, but there are no operations for listing available assessments, retrieving results, or managing the assessment lifecycle. The domain is clear but the surface is incomplete.
Loads one supported self-assessment into the widget by slug. Use gad7 for anxiety screening, phq9 for depression screening, and who5 for general well-being screening when the user wants to take one of those assessments.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | The name or slug of the test to retrieve (e.g., 'gad7') | |
| version | No | Optional version or variant identifier |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, and the description adds context about the widget loading and slug-based retrieval. It does not contradict annotations and provides extra context about the supported assessments, though it doesn't detail error behavior or what happens with an invalid slug.
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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and every word adds value. It provides both a general statement and specific examples without redundancy or fluff.
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 two-parameter tool with rich annotations, the description is complete. It covers what the tool does, when to use it, and example inputs. No output schema is present, but the tool's purpose is to load into a widget, so return values are not critical to describe.
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?
The schema already covers both parameters with clear descriptions (name, version). The description adds further semantic value by listing valid slugs and their associated purposes, which helps the agent choose the correct `name` value beyond the schema's generic example.
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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Loads one supported self-assessment into the widget by slug.' It specifies the resource (self-assessment), the verb (loads), and provides concrete examples (gad7, phq9, who5), making the purpose unmistakable even without siblings to differentiate from.
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 explicitly tells the agent when to use this tool: when the user wants to take a supported assessment, and even maps specific slugs to mental health conditions (gad7 for anxiety, phq9 for depression, who5 for well-being). This is direct, actionable usage guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
mental-health-get-testRead-only MCP for public mental-health workflows and Evidence from 病み期の読み物.
Hosted MCP server for the Healthie EHR & telehealth API: patients, appointments, charting, tasks.
Hosted MCP for website health monitoring. Tools: check_site, list_sites, get_site.
Hosted MCP for denial, prior auth, reimbursement, workflow validation, batch scoring, and feedback.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.