CDC PLACES Health Data

compare_counties

Compare specific CDC PLACES measures across multiple counties.

Returns a side-by-side comparison of selected health measures for the
given counties. Useful for benchmarking one county against peers.

Args:
    fips_list: List of 5-digit county FIPS codes (e.g. ['53033', '53053', '06037']).
               Maximum 10 counties per request.
    measures: List of PLACES measure IDs to compare (e.g. ['DIABETES', 'OBESITY']).
              Maximum 10 measures per request.

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": {
      "fips_list": "<fips_list>",
      "measures": "<measures>"
    },
    "name": "compare_counties"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`measures`	Yes
`fips_list`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedApr 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses input limits (max 10 counties, 10 measures) and mentions the output is a 'side-by-side comparison,' but lacks details on data freshness, error handling, or response structure. The presence of an output schema mitigates the need for some behavioral detail.

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: a one-line purpose statement, a single sentence on usefulness, and structured Args documentation. Every sentence adds value, and the Args section is clearly separated.

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 complexity (comparison with two array parameters, limits), the description is mostly complete: purpose, usage hint, parameter details, and limits. It lacks discussion of error scenarios or data source recency, but the presence of an output schema covers the return structure. Overall, adequate for effective tool use.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, but the description's Args section fully documents both parameters: fips_list (list of 5-digit FIPS codes, max 10) and measures (list of measure IDs, max 10). This adds meaning far beyond the bare schema, including format and constraints.

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 compares CDC PLACES measures across multiple counties, providing a side-by-side comparison. It uses a specific verb ('compare') and resource ('counties', 'measures'). The description naturally distinguishes this tool from siblings like get_county_measures (single county) and get_measure_by_state (state-level).

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: it is 'useful for benchmarking one county against peers.' This implies when to use the tool (for comparison). However, it does not explicitly exclude other cases or mention alternative sibling tools for non-comparison needs.

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

All CDC PLACES Health Data 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?