Chia Health MCP

Get Medication Details

medications_details

Read-only

Get detailed information about a specific medication including: all available dosage strengths and titration schedules, available forms (injectable vials, pre-filled syringes, oral dissolving tablets, sublingual drops), all active plan options with pricing for each, what's included (provider consultation, medication, shipping, ongoing support), contraindications, and common side effects. Supports queries by medication name (e.g. 'semaglutide', 'tirzepatide', 'sermorelin', 'NAD+', 'glutathione') or by category (e.g. 'weight loss', 'peptides', 'anti-aging'). Use this to look up exact plan durations and pricing.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`category`	No	Filter by category (e.g. 'weight loss', 'peptides', 'anti-aging')
`client_ip`	No	Client IP address for rate limiting
`medication`	Yes	Medication name (e.g. 'semaglutide', 'tirzepatide', 'sermorelin', 'NAD+', 'glutathione')

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already signal readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by enumerating exactly what data is returned (forms, plan options, included services, side effects) and supporting both name and category queries. It does not contradict annotations and provides extra value beyond the hints.

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 longer than typical but front-loads the main purpose and then delivers dense, useful enumeration. Each clause adds specifics (forms, pricing, included services, contraindications, side effects) without fluff, though it could be slightly more structured.

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 the output schema present and annotations covering safety, the description provides a thorough overview of what can be queried and what the response will include. It covers the full query space (name/category), supported medication examples, and the practical use case, making it complete for an agent to invoke 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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by giving concrete examples for both medication names and categories, clarifying how the parameters are meant to be used together. This goes beyond the schema's basic descriptions.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('detailed information about a specific medication'), listing concrete content (dosage strengths, titration schedules, forms, pricing, contraindications, side effects). It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like medications_list and medications_pricing by emphasizing detailed per-medication data.

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 description states when to use the tool: 'Use this to look up exact plan durations and pricing.' It gives query patterns (by medication name or category) but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name an alternative sibling, though the context is clear.

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

All Chia Health MCP tools Inspect

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

A3.9/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Every tool targets a distinct resource and action within the telehealth workflow: auth, consent, eligibility, intake, medications, checkout, order, portal, and provider communication. Even the multiple medication tools (list, details, availability, pricing) have clearly separated purposes, and there is no overlap among the 34 tools.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent `domain_verb` or `domain_noun` snake_case pattern, prefixed by their domain (auth_, checkout_, consent_, intake_, medications_, order_, portal_, provider_). There are no mixed conventions or vague verbs, making the API predictable and easy to navigate.

Tool Count2/5

With 34 tools, the server exceeds the 25+ threshold for 'too many' and feels fragmented. Many tools could be consolidated (e.g., medication pricing and availability could fold into details, and consent list/status could be combined). While the scope is broad, the count is excessive for a well-scoped MCP server.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers the full patient lifecycle from authentication and consent through eligibility, intake, checkout, order management, and post-order portal features. Minor gaps include lack of order cancellation or order listing, and no explicit intake update mechanism, but these are workable and do not block core workflows.

Resources

Need Help?