Skip to main content
Glama

regional_price_benchmark

[Taxonomy III.43 — baseline response (public data only)] Regional price benchmark for a CPT at state/metro/ZIP3 granularity.

WHEN TO USE: User wants to understand what a service typically costs, compare prices across regions/providers, or gauge whether a billed amount is reasonable.

WHEN NOT: For a specific bill they have in hand, scan_bill_for_errors is more actionable. For insurance-path estimates, use deductible_impact_calculator or coinsurance_simulator.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "regional_price_benchmark"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'public data only' hinting at read-only behavior, but does not explicitly state side effects, data handling, or safety. It lacks a clear statement that it performs no modifications or that it is purely informational.

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 concise and well-structured, using clear WHEN TO USE and WHEN NOT sections. Every sentence provides value, and there is no redundant or vague language.

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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: it explains the purpose, the granularity, when to use it, and when to use alternatives. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to decide whether to invoke it.

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?

The input schema has zero parameters, so there are no parameters to describe. According to the baseline rule, 0 parameters warrants a score of 4. The description does not need to explain any parameter semantics.

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?

Clearly states the tool's function: providing a regional price benchmark for a CPT code at state/metro/ZIP3 granularity. The verb 'benchmark' is specific and the scope is well-defined. It also distinguishes itself by specifying when not to use it, referencing scan_bill_for_errors and insurance simulators.

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?

Explicitly provides WHEN TO USE and WHEN NOT sections, naming specific alternative tools and the conditions that make them more appropriate. This leaves no ambiguity about when to choose this tool over others.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources