CMS Medicare Data

get_medicare_spending

Get Medicare spending per beneficiary by geographic area.

Returns geographic variation in Medicare spending including per-capita
costs and total spending amounts. Filter by state, county, or year.

Args:
    state: Two-letter US state abbreviation (e.g. 'CA', 'TX').
    county: County name to filter by (e.g. 'Los Angeles').
    year: Year of spending data (e.g. 2022).
    limit: Maximum number of records to return (default 50, max 1000).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`year`	No
`limit`	No
`state`	No
`county`	No

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, the description carries the full burden. It discloses return values (per-capita costs, total spending) and the limit parameter's default and max. However, it does not mention behavior when no filters are applied, how multiple filters interact, or pagination details. This is a moderate level of disclosure, hence a 3.

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 brief purpose statement, a one-sentence summary of return values, and a clear list of arguments. It front-loads the most important information and contains no wasted words.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, return data, parameters, and limit behavior. Since an output schema exists, it need not detail return values further. Minor gaps like unspecified filter interactions exist, but overall it is sufficiently complete for a straightforward data retrieval tool.

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 0% description coverage, so the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter with examples: state abbreviation, county name, year, and limit with default and max. This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema and earns top score.

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 explicitly states 'Get Medicare spending per beneficiary by geographic area', which clearly identifies the tool's function with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools that focus on chronic conditions, hospital quality, readmissions, and enrollment by focusing specifically on spending.

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 context by stating what the tool returns and offering filter options ('Filter by state, county, or year'). It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the purpose is clear enough to guide selection. This falls short of a 5 but is above a 3 because context is present.

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

All CMS Medicare Data 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

A4.4/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct Medicare dataset: chronic conditions, hospital quality, hospital readmissions, enrollment, and spending. There is no overlap in purpose or output, making tool selection unambiguous.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent 'get_' prefix followed by a clear domain noun (e.g., get_chronic_conditions, get_hospital_quality). This predictable verb_noun pattern holds across all tools with no exceptions.

Tool Count5/5

With 5 tools, the server is well-scoped for a focused Medicare data access API. Each tool covers a major data category, and the number is neither too few to be useful nor too many to be unwieldy.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers core Medicare data domains: conditions, hospital performance, readmissions, enrollment, and spending. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no provider directory or drug spending data), but the current set addresses primary use cases without significant dead ends.

Resources

Need Help?