GPH Intelligence - Healthcare Vendor Finder

Get Vendor Profile Detail

get_provider_detail

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get the full profile of one healthcare vendor by slug. Use this after match_practice or search_providers when the user asks to "tell me more about [vendor]", "what services does [vendor] offer", "where did GPH get this information", or wants contact info or services for a specific provider. Returns company_name, category, city/state, quality_score (0-100; profile completeness, not a quality rating; 0 means never scored), description, services offered, practice_size_fit, phone and website where listed, Google rating and Google review count where present, a Provenance section that labels each fact GPH-researched, Vendor-supplied, GPH-verified or GPH conclusion with its last-checked date where one exists, and the profile URL. No listing carries a verified badge: the legacy verified flag is not a recorded check and is not shown. Where a vendor has been enrichment-extracted, the description, services and practice-size fit come from that extraction, the profile adds certifications and compliance attestations, locations served and founding year where extracted, and the response states the extraction confidence and what it was grounded in (where the extraction abstained on practice-size fit, the legacy listing value is returned and labelled as not extracted); otherwise the legacy listing fields are returned. Slug comes from match_practice or search_providers results; returns an error if the slug is unknown.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`slug`	Yes	Provider slug identifier (e.g. 'ams-solutions-inc-dallas-tx'). Obtained from match_practice or search_providers response.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ids`	No	Absent when isError.
`count`	No	Always 1 on success; absent when isError.
`content`	Yes
`isError`	No	Present and true only when the slug is unknown or the fetch fails.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedJul 4, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "content": {
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "text": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": {
+            "const": "text"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "type",
+          "text"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "count": {
+      "const": 1,
+      "description": "Always 1 on success; absent when isError."
+    },
+    "ids": {
+      "description": "Absent when isError.",
+      "properties": {
+        "drilled": {
+          "description": "The slug that was looked up.",
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "isError": {
+      "description": "Present and true only when the slug is unknown or the fetch fails.",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "content"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedApr 17, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / slug / description

Previous value: -"Provider slug identifier (e.g. 'ams-solutions-inc-dallas-tx')"New value: +"Provider slug identifier (e.g. 'ams-solutions-inc-dallas-tx'). Obtained from match_practice or search_providers response."

First observedApr 14, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With readOnly/idempotent annotations already covering the safety profile, the description still adds substantial behavioral context: the Provenance labelling scheme, the statement that no listing carries a verified badge (explicitly countering the legacy flag), and the enrichment-extraction fallback rules including confidence reporting. It does not, however, discuss rate limits, caching, or pagination, so it stops short of full disclosure.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The first two sentences are tightly front-loaded and earn their place. The remainder is a long, dense enumeration of return fields that largely duplicates the output schema, and the enrichment-extraction sentence is a run-on that is hard to parse on first read.

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?

For a read-only single-param lookup with an output schema and full annotation coverage, the description supplies everything an agent needs: when to call it, where the slug comes from, failure behavior, and the nuanced semantics of provenance and extraction-sourced fields.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% on a single param, so the baseline is 3. The description adds real value beyond the schema by naming the originating tools for the slug and stating that an unknown slug returns an error, which the schema alone does not convey.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource+scope: 'Get the full profile of one healthcare vendor by slug.' It is immediately distinguishable from the sibling tools, which are named as the sources that produce the slug. No ambiguity about what is retrieved.

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?

Explicitly says to use it 'after match_practice or search_providers' and enumerates the user phrasings that should trigger it ('tell me more about [vendor]', 'what services does [vendor] offer', etc.). It also states the unknown-slug error condition, so the agent knows the failure mode.

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

All GPH Intelligence - Healthcare Vendor Finder 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.