Skip to main content
Glama

DRGSystem — German medical coding catalogs

by de.drgsystem

ICD-10-GM-Kode abrufen

icd10_get
Read-onlyIdempotent

Liefert in 'focus' alle Angaben zu einem ICD-10-GM-Kode: Kodier-Kennzeichen, Inklusiva/Exklusiva und Kodierhinweise, Einträge des Alphabetischen Verzeichnisses, zugeordnete ATC-Wirkstoffe, Morbi-RSA-Gruppen sowie DKR- und SEG-4-Verweise. Dazu in 'parents' die übergeordneten Kodes und in 'items' die direkt untergeordneten. Ohne Kode aufgerufen liefert die Funktion die oberste Ebene, sodass sich der Katalog Ebene für Ebene durchlaufen lässt. [EN] Everything about one ICD-10-GM code: coding flags, inclusions, exclusions, coding notes, alphabetical index entries, cross-references, parent and child codes. Call it after a search to inspect a hit; call it without a code to browse the catalog from the top.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
codeNoICD-Kode, normalisiert oder in amtlicher Schreibweise (z. B. 'E110' oder 'E11.0'). Leer lassen für die oberste Ebene des Katalogs.
yearNoKatalogjahr (z. B. 2026). Leer lassen für das aktuellste verfügbare Jahr.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
yearNoKatalogjahr, aus dem alle Daten dieser Antwort stammen.
focusNoDer abgefragte Kode mit allen Detaildaten. Null bei einer Suche und beim Katalog-Einstieg (leerer Kode).
itemsNoDie Kodeliste der Antwort: bei einer Abfrage die direkt untergeordneten Kodes von 'focus' (bzw. die oberste Ebene bei leerem Kode), bei einer Suche die Treffer.
parentsNoÜbergeordnete Kodes von 'focus' als Pfad von der obersten Ebene abwärts (Brotkrumen). Leer bei einer Suche und beim Katalog-Einstieg.

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The annotations already mark the tool as read-only and idempotent, and the description adds rich behavioral detail beyond that: it discloses the response structure ('focus', 'parents', 'items'), enumerates the content categories, and specifies that a call with no code returns the top level for hierarchical browsing. This goes well beyond the structured hint and matches 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 description is dense but not bloated; the German paragraph enumerates the major result sections in one efficient clause, and the English sentence summarizes the same intent. Slight repetition across languages is acceptable for a bilingual tool, and the key usage guidance is front-loaded near the end and clear.

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?

Given that the output schema exists, the parameter schema covers both optional parameters, and annotations declare the tool read-only and idempotent, the description completes the picture by explaining the browse-from-root behavior and the distinction from search tools. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to select and invoke this tool 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?

The schema already provides 100% coverage for 'code' and 'year', including normalization examples and defaults. The description adds meaningful semantics by explaining that omitting 'code' produces the top catalog level, which is not just a null default but a distinct browsing behavior. This supplements the schema without repeating it.

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 names a specific verb and resource: it delivers all details for an ICD-10-GM code, including coding flags, inclusions/exclusions, notes, index entries, and cross-references. It also distinguishes itself from search tools by stating it inspects a hit or browses the catalog from the top, which separates it from icd10_search and icd10alpha_get.

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?

The description explicitly says when to call this tool: 'Call it after a search to inspect a hit' and 'call it without a code to browse the catalog from the top.' This gives clear, actionable guidance for choosing it over the sibling search tools, and explains the null-code browse entry point without ambiguity.

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

All DRGSystem — German medical coding catalogs toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool is explicitly paired with a search and a get operation per catalog, with distinct roles: search returns hits, get returns full records plus hierarchy. Potential confusion between ICD/OPS systematic and alphabetic searches is actively resolved in the descriptions by cross-referencing exactly when to use each.

Naming Consistency5/5

The vast majority of tools follow a predictable <catalog>_search and <catalog>_get pattern, with alphabetic variants like icd10alpha_search/icd10alpha_get. The single exception, lg_ops_strukturmerkmale, is still descriptive and clearly tied to the Leistungsgruppe domain, so the overall naming remains coherent.

Tool Count4/5

At exactly 25 tools, the server sits at the heavy end of the typical range, but each pair covers a distinct official German medical coding catalog or reference work. Given the broad scope—ATC, ICD, OPS, DRG, PEPP, DKR, SEG-4, hospitals, Leistungsgruppen, and Zusatzentgelte—the count is justified rather than bloated.

Completeness5/5

The server provides consistent search and full-record retrieval for every catalog it exposes, including alphabetic indexes where relevant and hierarchy browsing via get-without-code. Cross-references between ICD, OPS, DRG, ATC, DKR, and SEG-4 are integrated into the get operations, so there are no obvious dead ends for the domain.

Resources