Skip to main content
Glama

Distill

Posted hospital prices for one billing code near a US ZIP code or point

hospital_prices
Read-only

From the machine-readable standard-charge files hospitals must publish (45 CFR 180), parsed and normalized: for each hospital within the radius that posts the code, nearest first, the gross charge, the discounted cash price, the de-identified minimum and maximum, and every payer and plan’s negotiated dollar amount or percentage (with the v3.0 median, 10th and 90th percentile allowed amounts), payers canonicalized to a stable payer_id. Filters: payer, plan type, plan name text, setting, billing class. A summary gives nearest-rank statistics over the hospitals returned. Served states: Colorado. An area with no hospital posting the code answers 404 and is not charged. Price: $0.02 per call. Free tier: 3 free calls a day per IP, at most 3 rows per answer, taken by an unpaid call unless its _meta["distill/free-tier"] is "skip". Confidence: Mean over the returned rows (each rate; an item with no rate counts once) of normalize × quality × freshness. Normalize: the stored per-rate normalize confidence (payer canonicalization: rule 1, model 0.9, fallback 0.6; rate basis for rates with no dollar amount: rule 1, model 0.9, fallback 0.75; 1 for an item with no rate). Quality of the MRF: 1 valid against the v3.0 schema, 0.85 parsed with conformance errors, 0.7 parsed only after header repair. Freshness: 1 while the MRF’s last_updated_on is at most 365 days old, then halving every 180 days (0.5 with no date), times 1 within 14 days of our fetch, then halving every 30 days. Posted standard charges from hospital machine-readable files (45 CFR 180): posted rates, not a quote; not medical or financial advice. What you pay depends on your plan, your care and the hospital. See /terms.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
latNoLatitude of the point (with lon).
lonNoLongitude of the point (with lat).
zipNoA 5-digit ZIP code (its Census ZCTA point). Give a zip, or lat and lon.
codeYesThe billing code: CPT (5 characters, e.g. 99213), HCPCS Level II (a letter and 4 digits, e.g. J1885) or MS-DRG (3 digits, e.g. 470).
planNoOptional: text the plan name (or payer name) contains as the hospital writes it, case-insensitive, e.g. "PPO" or "Medicare Advantage".
limitNoHow many hospitals to return, nearest first (default 10, at most 50).
payerNoOptional: a canonical payer_id (e.g. aetna, cigna, unitedhealthcare, anthem, medicare, medicaid). hospital.payers lists the payers with prices for a code.
settingNoOptional: inpatient or outpatient (items posted for both always match).
code_typeNoOptional: the code type. Inferred from the code’s shape when omitted.
plan_typeNoOptional: the canonical plan type.
radius_milesNoSearch radius in miles (default 25, at most 100).
billing_classNoOptional: facility or professional (items posted for both always match).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint=false; the description adds substantial context the annotations cannot: $0.02 per call pricing, the 3-free-calls-per-day IP tier, the 'skip' meta flag, 404 semantics, and a full confidence model (normalize × quality × freshness). This is far beyond what structured fields convey and is consistent with the annotations.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is one dense paragraph carrying high-value operational facts (pricing, free tier, 404) that are buried after the return-field list and before a very granular freshness-halving formula. The confidence math (halving every 180/30 days) is arguably documentation-grade detail rather than selection-critical text, hurting front-loading.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by enumerating the returned fields (gross charge, discounted cash, min/max, negotiated amounts, v3.0 median/percentiles) and the summary statistics. For a 12-parameter, pay-per-call tool, an agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all 12 parameters with patterns, enums and examples. The description restates the filter set (payer, plan type, plan name, setting, billing class) without adding format or default detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource up front: returns posted hospital standard charges for one billing code near a ZIP or point, nearest first. The scope (one code, geographic radius, MRF-sourced charges) is precise enough to separate it from hospital_compare and hospital_payers without opening any schema.

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?

Gives clear context (one code near a location, with filters) and explicitly routes to a sibling: 'hospital.payers lists the payers with prices for a code.' It also states the 404/no-charge behavior and free-tier limits, which guide invocation. It stops short of an explicit when-to-use-this-vs-hospital_compare statement, so it is strong but not a full 5.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources