Agent Utils (x402)

by dev.workers.revenue-agent-jw.agent-utils-x402-production

FDA drug label (openFDA)

fda_drug_label

Read-onlyIdempotent

FDA drug label (package insert, SPL) lookup via openFDA by brand or generic name, NDC or set ID; prefers the original packager's latest label. Useful for indications, dosing, boxed warnings, contraindications, interactions and adverse reactions. Returns label metadata (brand, generic, manufacturer, application number, NDCs, RxCUI) and selected sections trimmed to max_chars, plus DailyMed link and retrievedAt. Errors: 400 invalid input, 404 no label. PAID: $0.001 USDC per call on Base via x402 (MCP transport: retry with params._meta["x402/payment"]). Same tool over plain HTTP: GET /v1/fda/drug-label.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "fda_drug_label"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ndc`	No	product or package NDC
`name`	No	brand or generic name
`set_id`	No	SPL set id (UUID)
`sections`	No	comma-separated section keys, e.g. boxed_warning,indications_and_usage,drug_interactions
`max_chars`	No	per section, default 1500

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 3, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The description adds real behavioral context beyond the readOnly/openWorld/idempotent annotations: label-selection preference for the original packager's latest label, section truncation via max_chars, included metadata fields, and 400/404 error semantics. However, the payment behavior is asserted only as a pricing note with a terse x402 retry hint (params._meta['x402/payment']) that does not explain the payment challenge/retry sequence for a mutating-by-cost operation.

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-loaded with purpose, then data returned, then error and payment logistics; no filler sentences. It is dense but each clause (truncation, DailyMed link, retrievedAt, 404 semantics) carries information an agent needs.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by enumerating return fields and the DailyMed link, and it covers error codes and payment. The main residual gap is identifier precedence and exactness of name matching, which matters for a 5-param lookup with no required fields.

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 description maps the identifier params to lookup modes ('by brand or generic name, NDC or set ID') and explains that sections are trimmed to max_chars, but it does not resolve ambiguity about which identifier wins if several are passed or whether name matching is exact.

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 ('FDA drug label (package insert, SPL) lookup via openFDA') plus the three identifier modes (brand/generic name, NDC, set ID). The 'prefers the original packager's latest label' clause further pins down what makes this distinct from generic NDC or adverse-event siblings.

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?

The 'useful for indications, dosing, boxed warnings, contraindications, interactions and adverse reactions' sentence gives clear application context that tells an agent when this tool is the right source. There are no explicit exclusions or redirects to siblings such as fda_ndc_lookup, and no guidance on precedence when multiple identifiers are supplied.

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

All Agent Utils (x402) 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.

Resources

Need Help?