Skip to main content
Glama

Medical Terminologies MCP

by io.github.SidneyBissoli
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

LOINC Panel Structure

loinc_panels
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get the structure of a LOINC panel or form.

Use this tool to:

  • See all tests included in a panel (e.g., CBC, metabolic panel)

  • Get the structure of assessment forms

  • Find related observations grouped together

Returns the list of LOINC codes that make up the panel.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
loinc_numYesLOINC number (e.g., "2339-0")

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
panelYes
loinc_numYes
provenanceYesProvenance block (contract v1.1): source, URL, data vintage, extraction instant, origin diagnostics, citation, license
attributionYesCanonical source URLs of this response (attribution list)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedOutput schema / properties / provenance / description
      Previous value: -"Provenance block (contract v1.0): source, URL, data vintage, extraction instant, citation, license"New value: +"Provenance block (contract v1.1): source, URL, data vintage, extraction instant, origin diagnostics, citation, license"
    • addedOutput schema / properties / provenance / 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 / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "source",
-  "source_url",
-  "data_vintage",
-  "retrieved_at",
-  "citation",
-  "license"
-]New value: +[
+  "source",
+  "source_url",
+  "data_vintage",
+  "retrieved_at",
+  "retrieval",
+  "citation",
+  "license"
+]
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  3. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already establish readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the return summary (list of member LOINC codes), which is minor given an output schema exists.

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 purpose sentence followed by a tight, scannable bullet list. Slightly repetitive in restating 'structure' twice, but overall efficient.

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?

A simple read-only, single-parameter lookup with an output schema: purpose, use cases, and return type are all stated. Minor gap is the lack of sibling disambiguation, but nothing needed to invoke it 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 coverage is 100% with a single documented, patterned loinc_num, so the schema carries parameter meaning. The description adds no format or syntax detail beyond it, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get the structure of a LOINC panel or form') and reinforces it with concrete examples (CBC, metabolic panel). It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like loinc_details or loinc_search, so it falls short of 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?

The 'Use this tool to:' bullets give clear usage contexts (panel contents, form structure, grouped observations). There are no exclusions or named alternatives, so it stops short of the explicit when/when-not routing that earns a 5.

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 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