Skip to main content
Glama

DRGSystem — German medical coding catalogs

by de.drgsystem

Zusatzentgelt abrufen

ze_get
Read-onlyIdempotent

Liefert in 'focus' alle Angaben zu einem Zusatzentgelt: Betrag, alle auslösenden OPS-Kodes einschließlich der grau hinterlegten Kombinationspartner, die zugeordneten ICD-Kodes, die Fallpauschalen, neben denen es abgerechnet werden darf, und die Fußnoten mit Altersgrenzen, Mindestverweildauern und Ausschlüssen. Ohne Kode aufgerufen liefert die Funktion die oberste Ebene des Katalogs.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
codeNoZE-Kode (z. B. 'ZE01' oder 'ZE130.01'). 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

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds meaningful behavioral context: the response is delivered 'in focus', includes gray-shaded combination partners, associated ICD codes, case rates, and footnotes, and the top-level catalog behavior when no code is given. It enriches the annotation picture without contradicting it.

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 a single, dense sentence that front-loads the primary deliverable and then enumerates the included data elements. It is efficient and structured with a colon and comma-separated list, though the lengthy enumeration could arguably be shortened given that an output schema exists.

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?

The tool has an output schema and 100% schema description coverage, so return values and parameters are already covered. The description sufficiently covers special behaviors: no-code invocation returns the top level, and the response includes combination partners and footnotes. Minor gap: it does not mention when to route to the search sibling, but that is not essential for invoking this get tool correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The input schema already explains both 'code' and 'year' with examples, defaults, and null behavior. The description's statement about calling without a code mirrors the schema's 'Leer lassen' guidance and adds no new parameter semantics.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states a specific verb and resource: it returns ('Liefert') all details for a Zusatzentgelt, enumerating the exact data fields included. It also notes the no-code behavior (returning the catalog's top level). However, it does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling tools like ze_search, so it lacks explicit sibling differentiation.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies this is the tool to use when you have a specific ZE code and need its full details, and it explains what happens if no code is provided. However, it never explicitly states when to prefer this tool over the sibling search tool ze_search, offering no when-not-to-use guidance.

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