New York State Workers' Compensation Hub

NY SLU % for a joint replacement

calculate_slu_joint_replacement

Read-onlyIdempotent

The schedule loss of use percentage for a shoulder, hip or knee replacement on its own scoring track (2018 NY Impairment Guidelines Tables 5.5 / 6.5 / 7.5, as the app's engine encodes them): the base, plus the value that most closely matches the deficit in each column (range of motion, position, atrophy, chronic complications), up to the table maximum. A failed replacement is reported as not schedulable. Shoulder takes flexion/abduction; hip takes flexion, leg-length discrepancy, mal-rotation, hip_fracture; knee takes flexion, extension contracture, malalignment, ML laxity, AP motion, leg length. New York State only. Computes with The Comp Desk calc-core, the same engine as the app and the Pro Workspace; it never estimates. A missing input returns status "missing" and nothing is calculated. Returns the figures, the steps with the rule and engine function behind each, and the not-legal-advice notice.

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": {
      "joint": "<joint>"
    },
    "name": "calculate_slu_joint_replacement"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`joint`	Yes
`failed`	No	The replacement failed (not schedulable).
`ap_motion_mm`	No	Knee: anterior-posterior motion, millimetres.
`hip_fracture`	No	Hip: the replacement followed a fracture.
`atrophy_inches`	No	Atrophy, inches (mid-arm for the shoulder, mid-thigh for hip/knee).
`months_post_op`	No	Months since the replacement (the engine warns under its minimum).
`flexion_degrees`	No	Flexion, degrees.
`abduction_degrees`	No	Shoulder: abduction, degrees.
`ml_laxity_degrees`	No	Knee: medial-lateral laxity, degrees.
`mal_rotation_degrees`	No	Hip: mal-rotation, degrees.
`malalignment_degrees`	No	Knee: malalignment, degrees.
`chronic_complications`	No
`extension_contracture_degrees`	No	Knee: extension contracture (flexion deformity), degrees.
`leg_length_discrepancy_inches`	No	Hip or knee: leg-length discrepancy, inches.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond readOnly/idempotent annotations, it discloses that the engine never estimates, that a missing input returns status "missing" with nothing calculated, that inputs are threshold-matched up to the table maximum, that the engine warns under a minimum months-post-op, and that results include steps with rule and engine function plus a not-legal-advice notice. That is substantial behavior an agent cannot get from annotations alone.

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?

Front-loads the core purpose and table reference, then layers jurisdiction, input mapping, engine provenance, and failure/output behavior. Dense but organized; a couple of clauses (repeating the engine name twice) could be trimmed.

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 14 optional parameters and no output schema, the description still covers what is returned (figures plus stepwise rules), the failure mode ("missing"), the not-schedulable case, and jurisdiction. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly appears absent.

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 86%, so the baseline is 3; the description adds value by grouping inputs per joint (shoulder: flexion/abduction; hip: flexion, leg-length, mal-rotation, hip_fracture; knee: flexion, extension contracture, malalignment, ML laxity, AP motion, leg length), telling an agent which fields matter for a given joint enum. Some of this overlaps the schema's own per-field joint prefixes, keeping it below 5.

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 (schedule loss of use percentage for shoulder/hip/knee replacement) and pins it to the 2018 NY Impairment Guidelines Tables 5.5/6.5/7.5, distinguishing it from the ROM-based sibling. The per-joint input lists make the scope unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly scopes to New York State only and states that a failed replacement is not schedulable, which is a real usage boundary. It does not name an alternative tool (e.g. the ROM track or slu_award) or say when to prefer this one, so exclusion guidance stops short of a 5.

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

All New York State Workers' Compensation Hub 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.