Skip to main content
Glama

List bookable vets and staff

list_clinic_providers
Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this when the user wants to know which vets, nurses or assistants a Veterical clinic has, or needs their ids to book with one. Returns up to 100 staff with id and display name for one clinic (no contact details, roles or pet data). Not for staff days off or vacations.

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": {
      "clinicId": "<clinicId>"
    },
    "name": "list_clinic_providers"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
clinicIdYesClinic id: 24 lowercase hexadecimal characters

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
statusYes
providersYesStaff with a doctor, nurse or assistant role. Contact details, roles, colors, avatars and all animal or clinical data are excluded.
providerCountYes
providerCountIsLowerBoundYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedOutput schema / properties / providers / description
      Previous value: -"Display names of staff with a doctor, nurse or assistant role. Staff identifiers, contact details, roles, colors, avatars and all animal or clinical data are excluded."New value: +"Staff with a doctor, nurse or assistant role. Contact details, roles, colors, avatars and all animal or clinical data are excluded."
    • addedOutput schema / properties / providers / items / properties / id
      Added value: +{
      +  "anyOf": [
      +    {
      +      "pattern": "^[0-9a-f]{24}$",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    {
      +      "type": "null"
      +    }
      +  ],
      +  "description": "Staff id, for the providerIds of book_appointment"
      +}
    • changedOutput schema / properties / providers / items / required
      Previous value: -[
      -  "displayName"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "id",
      +  "displayName"
      +]
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / clinicId / description
      Previous value: -"Clinic id from list_clinics: 24 lowercase hexadecimal characters"New value: +"Clinic id: 24 lowercase hexadecimal characters"
  3. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / clinicId / description
      Previous value: -"Clinic id (24-character lowercase hex)"New value: +"Clinic id from list_clinics: 24 lowercase hexadecimal characters"
    • addedOutput schema / properties / providers / description
      Added value: +"Display names of staff with a doctor, nurse or assistant role. Staff identifiers, contact details, roles, colors, avatars and all animal or clinical data are excluded."
  4. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare the read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world profile, so the description only needs to add operational context. It does: it discloses the 100-staff cap and warns that no contact details, roles or pet data come back, which prevents over-trusting the response. It falls short of 5 only because pagination/truncation behavior beyond 'up to 100' is left implicit.

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?

Two tight sentences: the trigger and intended use come first, the return shape and cap second, and the exclusion last. No word is wasted and nothing is buried.

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

Completeness4/5

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

A one-parameter, read-only list tool with an output schema and full annotation coverage needs little more than this. Scope, result shape, size cap and exclusions are all covered; only pagination/ordering behavior is left unstated, a minor gap.

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 coverage is 100% and the single clinicId parameter has a precise pattern description, so the schema already carries the semantics. The description reinforces the 'one clinic' scoping but adds no new syntax or constraint details. 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 (list) and resource (vets, nurses, assistants at a Veterical clinic) plus the downstream purpose (getting ids to book with). An agent can distinguish this from siblings like get_clinic_availability or book_appointment without inspecting the schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives an explicit positive trigger ('when the user wants to know which vets... or needs their ids to book with one') and an explicit exclusion ('Not for staff days off or vacations'). This is exactly the when/when-not guidance that steers tool selection.

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