CDC MMWR Reports

get_disease_surveillance

Get current surveillance data for a notifiable disease from MMWR/CDC.

Searches recent MMWR articles for surveillance reports and case counts
related to a specific notifiable disease. Useful for tracking disease
trends, outbreak reports, and current epidemiological data.

Args:
    disease: Name of the disease (e.g. 'measles', 'tuberculosis',
        'salmonella', 'pertussis', 'hepatitis A').

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`disease`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states that the tool 'searches recent MMWR articles' and retrieves surveillance reports and case counts, implying a read-only operation. However, it does not explicitly confirm safety, mention any limitations, or describe how the output is structured (though an output schema exists). This provides basic transparency but lacks richer behavioral context.

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: a clear opening sentence, a brief elaboration on use cases, and a focused Args section. Every sentence earns its place without unnecessary redundancy, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter) and the existence of an output schema, the description is nearly complete. It covers purpose, usage context, and parameter semantics. It does not address edge cases or error conditions, but these are less critical for a straightforward read-only search tool, so the description is adequate.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema has zero coverage for parameter descriptions, so the description must compensate. It does so effectively with an Args section specifying that 'disease' is the name of the disease and providing concrete examples ('measles', 'tuberculosis', etc.). This adds clear meaning beyond the schema's bare 'Disease' title.

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 with a specific verb and resource: 'Get current surveillance data for a notifiable disease from MMWR/CDC.' It goes on to explain that it searches MMWR articles for surveillance reports and case counts, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_recent_reports or search_mmwr by focusing specifically on disease surveillance data.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool: 'Useful for tracking disease trends, outbreak reports, and current epidemiological data.' This implies the tool is appropriate for those scenarios, though it does not explicitly exclude other tools or mention alternatives, so it falls short of a 5.

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

All CDC MMWR Reports 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

A4.1/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

The four tools have distinct purposes: search_mmwr finds articles by topic, get_recent_reports lists latest reports, get_report_detail fetches a specific article's details, and get_disease_surveillance specializes in surveillance data for a disease. There is slight overlap between get_disease_surveillance and search_mmwr, but the descriptions clarify that the former is disease-specific and returns surveillance data.

Naming Consistency4/5

The naming pattern is mostly consistent with get_ prefix for retrieval actions (get_recent_reports, get_report_detail, get_disease_surveillance) and search_mmwr for search. The suffixes vary (reports, detail, surveillance), which is acceptable but not perfectly uniform.

Tool Count5/5

With only 4 tools, the server is well-scoped for its purpose of providing MMWR report access. Each tool earns its place: search, recent list, detail retrieval, and disease-specific surveillance. No redundancy or excess.

Completeness4/5

The set covers the core workflow for MMWR reports: search, list recent, and get details. It also adds a specialized disease surveillance tool. A minor gap is the lack of full-text access, but abstract and metadata are sufficient for most use cases.

Resources

Need Help?