Medical Terminologies MCP

Find Equivalents Across Terminologies

find_equivalent

Read-onlyIdempotent

Ranked unified search for equivalent terms across multiple medical terminologies.

Use this tool to:

Find the same concept in different coding systems
Compare how terminologies represent a concept
Support terminology mapping and data integration

Searches across: ICD-11, SNOMED CT, LOINC, RxNorm, and MeSH. Set target_terminologies to limit which are searched, or set source_terminology to exclude one (e.g. when you already have a code from that terminology and want equivalents elsewhere). The two combine: source is subtracted from targets. limit caps candidates per terminology (default 5, max 10).

Every candidate carries match_score (lexical similarity to the search term, 0-1) and rank (global position across all searched terminologies) — both computed by this server, since upstreams don't expose comparable relevance scores. Candidates from different terminologies whose titles are lexically identical are clustered in groups — a strong same-concept signal (absence of a group is NOT evidence of non-equivalence).

Searches upstreams in English. For official pt-BR content, use the dedicated tools: icd11_search/mesh_search accept language: "pt", and cid10_search is natively Portuguese.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`term`	Yes	Medical term to search (e.g., "diabetes", "aspirin")
`limit`	No	Maximum candidates returned PER terminology (1-10, default 5). This is a cap, not a page: the live fan-out has no stable cursor across five upstreams, so raise the limit instead of paging.
`source_terminology`	No	If set, this terminology is excluded from the search. Use this when the term came from this terminology and you want equivalents in the others. Combines with target_terminologies by subtraction (source is removed from the target list).
`target_terminologies`	No	Limit the search to these terminologies. If omitted, all five are searched.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`term`	Yes
`groups`	Yes
`ranking`	Yes
`results`	Yes
`provenance`	Yes	One provenance block per upstream source that contributed to this response (contract v1.1; licenses are never merged; each block carries the origin diagnostics of ITS source)
`attribution`	Yes	Canonical source URLs of this response (attribution list)
`source_terminology`	Yes
`searched_terminologies`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedSep 27, 2026

changedOutput schema / properties / provenance / description

Previous value: -"One provenance block per upstream source that contributed to this response (contract v1.0; licenses are never merged)"New value: +"One provenance block per upstream source that contributed to this response (contract v1.1; licenses are never merged; each block carries the origin diagnostics of ITS source)"

addedOutput schema / properties / provenance / items / description

Added value: +"Bloco de proveniência (contrato v1.1): fonte, URL, competência, extração, diagnóstico de origem, citação e licença"

addedOutput schema / properties / provenance / items / properties / retrieval

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "properties": {
+        "anomalies": {
+          "description": "Anomalias superadas até o sucesso, somadas por classe, em ordem fixa; [] se nenhuma",
+          "items": {
+            "additionalProperties": false,
+            "properties": {
+              "count": {
+                "description": "Ocorrências desta classe na chamada",
+                "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+                "minimum": 1,
+                "type": "integer"
+              },
+              "kind": {
+                "description": "Classe da anomalia (vocabulário fechado do contrato)",
+                "enum": [
+                  "timeout",
+                  "network",
+                  "http_4xx",
+                  "http_5xx",
+                  "rate_limited",
+                  "malformed_body"
+                ],
+                "type": "string"
+              }
+            },
+            "required": [
+              "kind",
+              "count"
+            ],
+            "type": "object"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        "attempts": {
+          "description": "Tentativas somadas, incluindo as repetidas (>= requests)",
+          "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+          "minimum": 1,
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "requests": {
+          "description": "Idas distintas à origem que compõem esta resposta (fatias, páginas)",
+          "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+          "minimum": 1,
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "unstable": {
+          "description": "true se houve repetição (attempts > requests) ou alguma anomalia",
+          "type": "boolean"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "requests",
+        "attempts",
+        "anomalies",
+        "unstable"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "description": "Origin diagnostics of THIS source in this call (contract v1.1): requests made to the upstream, attempts summed across retries, anomalies worked around (kind + count); unstable=true when any anomaly happened. null when nothing was measured (bundled dataset, or response served entirely from cache)"
+}

changedOutput schema / properties / provenance / items / required

Previous value: -[
-  "source",
-  "source_url",
-  "data_vintage",
-  "retrieved_at",
-  "citation",
-  "license"
-]New value: +[
+  "source",
+  "source_url",
+  "data_vintage",
+  "retrieved_at",
+  "retrieval",
+  "citation",
+  "license"
+]

Changed1 schema field changedSep 11, 2026
- addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```
First observedSep 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive/openWorld, and the description still adds real behavioral context: match_score and rank are server-computed because upstreams expose no comparable relevance scores, results are clustered into groups, absence of a group is explicitly NOT evidence of non-equivalence, and the search corpus is English-only. These are interpretive details an agent needs and cannot get from annotations.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded, then bulleted use cases, then parameter mechanics, then the clustering caveat and language limitation. Generally dense and every sentence carries weight, though slightly long and mildly repetitive in restating the terminology coverage.

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 an output schema present, the description handles everything else: search scope, fan-out behavior, ranking provenance, grouping semantics with an important caveat, English-only limitation, and routing to pt-BR alternatives. An agent has all it needs to select and call this tool 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description earns above baseline by explaining how the two terminology parameters combine ('source is subtracted from targets') and restating the limit default/max, though much of this duplicates the schema 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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Ranked unified search for equivalent terms') and immediately bounds the scope with the exact terminologies searched (ICD-11, SNOMED CT, LOINC, RxNorm, MeSH). This clearly separates it from siblings like terminology_diff, map_icd10_to_icd11, and the single-terminology *_search tools.

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?

Provides explicit use cases (find the same concept across coding systems, compare representations, support mapping/integration) and names concrete alternatives with their trigger condition — for pt-BR content use icd11_search/mesh_search with language "pt" or cid10_search. It also tells the agent how to select between source_terminology and target_terminologies.

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

All Medical Terminologies MCP 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.