Skip to main content
Glama

Supplement Check

by io.github.GoodTurnStudio
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

A supplement's label, dose check and halal status

get_supplement
Read-onlyIdempotent

A supplement's label: amounts per serving, upper limit check, halal status and a buy link. Use for "what's in Nature Made vitamin D3?", "is Centrum halal?", "how much melatonin is in OLLY Sleep?" or "is this supplement halal?" with a barcode. Give q (brand and product name) or barcode. Returns per-serving amounts, dose_check (each vitamin and mineral compared with the adult upper limit at the most the label suggests per day, with per_day_base amounts), other_checks (melatonin, caffeine, creatine, ashwagandha and similar, including when a blend hides the amount), halal (likely_halal, doubtful, not_halal or depends_on_school, with the ingredients that need a confirmed source), alternatives (other sizes or versions), an Amazon link, and halal_options (links to halal-certified or gelatine-free versions) when the halal answer is not likely_halal. For a general name like "creatine monohydrate" it reads one common label and says so. With country=GB, dose_check uses the NHS guidance where it sets one (upper_limit says NHS guidance). Salt forms such as magnesium glycinate are counted as the mineral they hold (estimated: true), and omega-3 is read from EPA and DHA, total omega-3, or estimated from the fish oil weight.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qNoBrand and product name, for example Nature Made vitamin D3 2000 IU.
idNoA label id from the NIH database, for example from alternatives.
barcodeNoUPC or EAN barcode digits (8 to 14).
countryNoUS, GB, IE, CA, AU. GB uses NHS guidance for the dose checks; also picks the buy link site. Default from the request.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, yet the description adds substantial undisclosed-by-schema traits: fallback behavior for generic names ('reads one common label and says so'), country-dependent NHS guidance, and estimation flags (estimated: true for salt forms, omega-3 derived from EPA/DHA). These caveats materially affect how an agent should interpret results.

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 lead sentence front-loads the resource and its outputs, and the use-case examples follow logically. It is dense and packs return fields into two very long sentences, but with no output schema most of that detail earns its place.

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 no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing returns, and it does so thoroughly (dose_check, other_checks, halal, alternatives, halal_options, Amazon link) while covering edge cases like blends and generic names. Nothing an agent needs to call and interpret this tool correctly is missing.

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 all four parameters are already documented (q, id, barcode, country including GB/NHS behavior). The description largely restates these ('Give q (brand and product name) or barcode') and adds only marginal context, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 states a specific resource and scope: a supplement's label with per-serving amounts, dose check, halal status and buy link. An agent can tell what it returns without opening the schema. However, it never names or contrasts with the overlapping siblings (check_dose, get_nutrient, check_stack), so it misses the sibling-differentiation bar for a 5.

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?

Concrete example questions ('is Centrum halal?', 'how much melatonin is in OLLY Sleep?') give clear context for when to reach for this tool, and it states the input forms (q or barcode). It lacks any when-not guidance or routing to the sibling dose/nutrient tools, which matters given the overlap with check_dose.

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

All Supplement Check toolsInspect
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