Paw Multiverse animal poison services

Find the veterinary poison service for a country

find_pet_poison_service

Return the veterinary poison control service for a given country: the phone number, the hours, the fee as the operator publishes it, and whether the service will speak to the public or only to a veterinarian. Every number was read from the operating body's own website. IMPORTANT: several countries have a national poison centre that states in writing that it will NOT answer questions about animals; for those this tool returns that refusal rather than a number, and the correct advice is to contact a veterinarian. This tool returns contact details only. It contains no veterinary advice, no doses, no treatment guidance and no toxicity thresholds. Do not infer any of those from it.

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": {
      "country": "<country>"
    },
    "name": "find_pet_poison_service"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`country`	Yes	Country name or ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 code, for example Germany or DE.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 11, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does well: it discloses provenance (operating body's own website), the exact return contents, the refusal behavior for certain national poison centres, and the scope limitation against medical advice. It does not cover invalid-country handling or any access constraints, which keeps it below a 5.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with what the tool returns and then adds important safety caveats in a logical order. It is somewhat long for a one-parameter lookup tool, and the final scope sentence partly restates the first, but every sentence contributes useful context rather than noise.

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?

Given there is no output schema, the description fully specifies the relevant return values (phone, hours, fee, public/vet-only) and explains the critical exception where a refusal is returned instead of a number. For a simple contact-lookup tool, nothing essential is missing.

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

Parameters3/5

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

The input schema already has 100% description coverage for the single country parameter, explaining that it accepts a country name or ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 code with an example. The description adds no further parameter semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: return the veterinary poison control service for a given country, and it names the returned fields (phone, hours, fee, public/vet-only). It is clear what the tool does, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling list_pet_poison_countries tool.

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 makes the use case clear and includes a strong exclusion: it returns contact details only and must not be used for veterinary advice, doses, treatment guidance, or toxicity thresholds. It also explains the refusal edge case, but it does not name an alternative sibling tool for listing countries.

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

All Paw Multiverse animal poison services 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?