list_panelsList TestWell's bundled panels (multi-test packages priced below the sum of their tests), optionally filtered by category or maximum price. Sorted by price.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max results (default 25) | |
| category | No | Catalog category, e.g. 'Hormones', 'General Health' | |
| maxPrice | No | Only panels at or under this sticker price (USD) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: results are sorted by price and panels are priced below the sum of their individual tests. No contradictions with annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single efficient sentence that front-loads the resource, defines it, notes the optional filters, and states the sort order. Every part earns its place with no redundant or vague filler.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple read-only list tool with three optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the domain meaning, filter options, and sort behavior. It could be slightly more complete by noting the default result limit or the shape of returned items, but the schema handles the limit default and the intent is clear.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the input schema fully documents limit, category, and maxPrice. The description mentions filtering by category or maximum price but does not add significant semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides. This matches the baseline for complete schema coverage.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('TestWell's bundled panels'), and adds a parenthetical definition that clarifies exactly what a panel is. The optional filters and sort order make the tool's scope unambiguous and distinguish it from sibling tools like search_tests or get_test.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies the tool is for browsing catalog panels and supports filtering by category or max price, but it does not explicitly state when to choose this over sibling tools such as search_tests or recommend_tests. There are no exclusions or alternative routing instructions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a distinct primary purpose, but compare_prices and compare_provider have overlapping comparison themes that could lead to misselection if an agent is not careful. The descriptions provide enough context to differentiate them, but the boundary between searching for a test and getting its full detail could also cause minor confusion.
All tool names follow a clear verb_noun pattern with consistent snake_case formatting (e.g., calculate_free_testosterone, compare_prices, get_test, list_panels). The naming style is uniform and predictable across the entire set.
13 tools is a well-scoped count for a lab test service covering search, details, pricing, reference ranges, interpretation, comparisons, and educational guides. Each tool earns its place without feeling redundant or bloated.
The tool set covers the full user journey: searching and viewing tests, panels, pricing and ordering quotes, reference ranges, interpretation, unit conversion, and finding draw sites. There are no obvious dead ends or significant missing operations for the stated purpose of a consumer-facing lab test information and ordering service.