Meridian Trace — Medical Device Registrations

get_recent_registrations

Registrations newly added to Meridian in the last N days, optionally filtered by market, risk class or device type — the competitor-monitoring feed. Ordered by when we first saw the record, so it surfaces market entries as they appear rather than by approval date. US PMA supplements are excluded: they are labeling and site changes against an existing approval, not new registrations. Filtering by market is much faster — unfiltered across all markets can take up to 15 seconds, a market or two returns in about a second.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`days`	No	Look-back window, 1-180 (default 30)
`limit`	No	Max results (default 50, max 100)
`markets`	No	ISO2 codes, e.g. ["TH","ID"]
`risk_level`	No	Low \| Medium \| High
`device_type`	No	Resolved GMDN device type

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries full responsibility. It discloses ordering (by first-seen date), exclusions (US PMA supplements), and performance characteristics (filtering speed), which are significant behavioral details that inform the caller's expectations.

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 four sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose and filters, then logically adding ordering, exclusions, and performance notes. It uses em dashes effectively and contains no fluff, making it concise and well-structured.

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?

Given the absence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the essential aspects: purpose, filters, ordering, exclusions, and performance. It does not mention pagination or error scenarios, but these are not critical given the tool's simplicity and the presence of parameter constraints in the schema.

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 schema descriptions cover 100% of parameters, providing a baseline of 3. The description adds context by clarifying that market, risk class, and device type are optional filters, and highlights the performance impact of filtering by market, which slightly enhances understanding beyond the schema alone.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: retrieving recently added registrations in Meridian, with optional filters. It distinguishes itself as a competitor-monitoring feed, explicitly excluding US PMA supplements and ordering by first-seen date, which sets it apart from other listing 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 implies usage for competitor monitoring and notes performance differences when filtering by market, giving practical guidance. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like search_manufacturer or get_registrations, so the 'when-to-use' aspect is partially implicit.

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

All Meridian Trace — Medical Device Registrations 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

A4.2/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

The tools cover clearly different queries—classification, predicate lineage, similar devices, market presence, registration details, timelines, recent entries, license holders, and coverage—so most are easy to distinguish. However, the get_registration family and get_coverage/get_market_coverage share naming patterns that could cause initial misselection despite thorough descriptions.

Naming Consistency4/5

All tool names follow a snake_case verb-first pattern, which is consistent and readable. The main weakness is that get_coverage and get_market_coverage are name-level near-duplicates, and the registration variants require careful reading to tell apart.

Tool Count5/5

Eleven tools is well within the ideal range for a specialized regulatory data domain, and each tool addresses a distinct part of the workflow. None feel redundant or superfluous, and the set is small enough for reliable agent routing.

Completeness4/5

The domain is covered broadly: manufacturer resolution, registration list/detail, market presence, timelines, recent activity, license holders, classification, US predicate history, and competitive devices are all present. Minor gaps such as a direct global device-type search across all manufacturers or bulk export can be worked around with existing tools.

Resources

Need Help?