Skip to main content
Glama

What does Medicare pay for this CPT or HCPCS code at this ZIP? Physician Fee Schedule facility and non-facility allowed amounts with the RVUs and GPCIs behind them, any US ZIP or Medicare locality, 2025 on, computed by Distill from CMS’s quarterly RVU files

medicare_pfs_rate
Read-only

What does Medicare pay for this CPT or HCPCS code at this ZIP? Physician Fee Schedule facility and non-facility allowed amounts with the RVUs and GPCIs behind them, any US ZIP or Medicare locality, 2025 on, computed by Distill from CMS’s quarterly RVU files. From CMS’s quarterly relative value files (RVU25A on): the facility and non-facility allowed amounts for one code (and modifier) in the locality of a ZIP, ZIP+4 or MAC-locality id, with the RVUs, GPCIs and conversion factor (non-QP and QP) behind them, the OPPS cap, the limiting charge, the payment indicators and the same amounts in every release since 2025A. Pass exactly one of zip or locality. Codes CMS does not price (status other than A, R, T) answer with null amounts; unknown codes and ZIPs answer 404 and are not charged. Refreshed quarterly (live freshness: /status). Price: $0.01 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". Answers in a summary view of about 3,000 tokens; view: "full" for every row. Confidence: agreement × freshness. Agreement: for a 5-digit ZIP that CMS splits across localities by ZIP+4, the share of its ZIP+4 codes in the answered locality; 1 for a ZIP+4, a locality or a ZIP in one locality. Freshness: 1 until the first day of the calendar quarter after the CMS files were last checked, then halving every 30 days. The amounts themselves are exact (they agree with CMS’s carrier payment files to the cent). Medicare Physician Fee Schedule amounts computed from CMS’s published RVU, GPCI and conversion-factor files: what Original Medicare allows a participating clinician (before deductible and coinsurance), not what another payer pays; not a quote, not medical, billing or coding advice. See /terms. CPT® codes are served as codes only: their descriptors are AMA copyright and are never included (nor dental CDT descriptors). CPT is a registered trademark of the American Medical Association. HCPCS Level II descriptions are CMS’s.

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": {
      "code": "<code>"
    },
    "name": "medicare_pfs_rate"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
zipNoA 5-digit ZIP or ZIP+4 (80218 or 80218-1234).
codeYesThe HCPCS Level II or CPT code, e.g. 99213, 70551 or G0439.
dateNoThe date of service, YYYY-MM-DD (default: today, UTC): picks the release in force.
viewNosummary (the default): the answer a model needs, budgeted; full: every row (a free answer stays capped).
releaseNoA quarterly release instead of a date, e.g. 2026D (A from 1 Jan, B Apr, C Jul, D Oct).
settingNoOnly this setting’s amount (default: both).
localityNoA Medicare locality as MAC-locality, e.g. 04112-01 (Colorado).
modifierNoOptional modifier with its own RVUs: 26 (professional component), TC (technical component) or 53. Omit for the global service.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / view
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "summary (the default): the answer a model needs, budgeted; full: every row (a free answer stays capped).",
      +  "enum": [
      +    "summary",
      +    "full"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly and openWorld annotations, the description discloses pricing, the free-tier limit and row cap, summary token budget, full-view behavior, quarterly refresh cadence, confidence computation, null/404 semantics, and that CPT descriptors are omitted for copyright reasons. These are substantial operational details an agent could not infer from 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.

Conciseness4/5

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

The purpose is front-loaded and most sentences carry substantive constraints, caveats, or pricing details. It is long and somewhat dense, and the opening repeats the title, but the length is largely justified by the complexity and the lack of an output schema.

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?

With no output schema, the description does the work of explaining the returned amounts, the RVUs, GPCIs, conversion factors, OPPS cap, limiting charge, payment indicators, historical releases, and summary-vs-full views. It also covers error behavior and freshness, leaving little an agent needs to call this correctly.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds a meaningful constraint absent from the schema: exactly one of zip or locality must be supplied. It also clarifies that date selects the release in force and that modifier has its own RVUs, though most individual parameter meanings remain in the schema.

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 opens with a specific question and immediately states the exact resource: Physician Fee Schedule facility and non-facility allowed amounts for a CPT/HCPCS code at a ZIP or locality. It distinguishes the tool from any sibling by naming the CMS RVU source, the geographic resolution, and the 2025-on timeframe.

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 clear usage constraints: pass exactly one of zip or locality, codes CMS does not price return null, unknown codes/ZIPs return 404, and it is not a payer quote or billing advice. It does not name a sibling alternative, but no sibling performs the same Medicare PFS calculation.

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