RxRooster

Prepare an anesthesia service draft

prepare_anesthesia_service_draft

Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this when a CRNA, SRNA, or anesthesiologist wants to structure their own stated work terms, including an explicit call or no-call preference, for native RxRooster review. The draft is private and non-persistent here. Ask rate visibility neutrally. Do not include identity/contact fields or claim that the tool saved or published a service.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`state`	No	US state name or two-letter postal code.
`area_query`	No	City, metro, or public service-area label, without an address.
`work_types`	No
`days_of_week`	No
`radius_miles`	No	Approximate service radius; 3000 represents nationwide travel.
`provider_type`	Yes	The provider credential or training path stated by the user.
`contract_types`	No
`call_preference`	No	Explicit call preference: any means no restriction, no_call excludes call work, and call_ok means call is acceptable but not necessarily preferred.
`rate_visibility`	No
`availability_end`	No	Calendar date in YYYY-MM-DD format.
`shift_preferences`	No
`availability_start`	No	Calendar date in YYYY-MM-DD format.
`minimum_hourly_rate`	No
`shift_lengths_hours`	No
`minimum_annual_salary`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`draft`	Yes
`status`	Yes
`privacy`	Yes
`benefits`	Yes
`next_step`	Yes
`generated_at`	Yes
`provider_path`	Yes
`missing_fields`	Yes
`schema_version`	Yes
`draft_fingerprint`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 21, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / call_preference

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Explicit call preference: any means no restriction, no_call excludes call work, and call_ok means call is acceptable but not necessarily preferred.",
+  "enum": [
+    "any",
+    "no_call",
+    "call_ok"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / draft / properties / call_preference

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "enum": [
+        "any",
+        "no_call",
+        "call_ok"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ]
+}

changedOutput schema / properties / draft / required

Previous value: -[
-  "provider_type",
-  "area_query",
-  "state",
-  "radius_miles",
-  "availability_start",
-  "availability_end",
-  "days_of_week",
-  "shift_preferences",
-  "shift_lengths_hours",
-  "work_types",
-  "contract_types",
-  "minimum_hourly_rate",
-  "minimum_annual_salary",
-  "rate_visibility"
-]New value: +[
+  "provider_type",
+  "area_query",
+  "state",
+  "radius_miles",
+  "availability_start",
+  "availability_end",
+  "days_of_week",
+  "shift_preferences",
+  "call_preference",
+  "shift_lengths_hours",
+  "work_types",
+  "contract_types",
+  "minimum_hourly_rate",
+  "minimum_annual_salary",
+  "rate_visibility"
+]

AddedOct 21, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, but the description adds non-obvious behavior: the draft is private and non-persistent, and the agent must not report it as saved or published. 'Ask rate visibility neutrally' is a valuable presentation constraint that no structured field encodes. It does not explain validation failure behavior for the 15 constrained fields.

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?

Three tight sentences: the usage trigger first, the privacy/non-persistence contract second, guardrails last. Nothing is repeated from the title or schema, and every sentence changes agent behavior.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Output schema and annotations cover return shape and safety, and the description covers privacy and guardrails. But for a 15-parameter tool, it says nothing about how the draft fields relate to each other (e.g., rate vs. salary, availability windows) or what the review step does after the draft, leaving it only adequately specified.

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?

With 15 parameters and only 47% schema description coverage, the description would need to carry weight, yet it only reinforces two fields: call_preference and rate_visibility (the latter adding a 'neutral' framing not in the schema). Fields like work_types, contract_types, shift_lengths_hours, radius_miles, and the rate bounds get no help beyond their enums, so it partially compensates but leaves real gaps.

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 the resource precisely: the user's own stated work terms, including call/no-call preference, packaged as a private non-persistent draft for RxRooster review. It is clear what is produced, but it never distinguishes this 'service draft' from the sibling prepare_anesthesia_job_draft, leaving the agent to infer the split from the names alone.

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?

It gives an explicit trigger ('use this when a CRNA, SRNA, or anesthesiologist wants to structure their own stated work terms') plus exclusions ('do not include identity/contact fields', 'do not claim the tool saved or published'). It stops short of naming an alternative tool or saying when *not* to use this in favor of prepare_anesthesia_job_draft.

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

All RxRooster 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?