SiteCheck Company Records

openFDA National Drug Code directory: searches US drug

b2b_openfda_drug_ndc

Read-only

openFDA National Drug Code directory: searches US drug listings by brand or generic name and returns labeler (company), NDC code, dosage form, route, marketing start date and active ingredients. Public FDA data; not medical advice. Related tools on this server, for a different need: gov_openfda_drugsfda when you need FDA Drugs@FDA approval records from openFDA for a generic. Price: $0.002 in USDC per successful call, paid with x402 (Base, Solana or Arc); failed calls are not charged.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "q": "<q>"
    },
    "name": "b2b_openfda_drug_ndc"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`q`	Yes	Brand or generic name, letters, digits, spaces and - only, 2 to 60 characters
`limit`	No	Rows to return, 1 to 25 (default 10)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`count`	No
`query`	No
`source`	No
`results`	No
`checkedAt`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond them: the data is public FDA data, is explicitly 'not medical advice', costs $0.002 USDC per successful call via x402 on Base/Solana/Arc, and failed calls are not charged. It does not mention pagination or rate limits, which keeps it from a 5.

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 purpose and return fields are front-loaded, followed by disclaimer, sibling routing, and price in descending order of importance. No sentence is filler, though the 'Related tools... for a different need' phrasing is slightly convoluted and could be tightened.

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 needn't explain return values, and it still gives a useful field summary. Annotations cover the safety profile, the schema covers both parameters at 100%, and the description adds freshness/provenance, legal disclaimer, cost model, and sibling routing. Nothing an agent needs to call this 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 both `q` (character set, 2-60 chars) and `limit` (1-25, default 10) are already fully documented in structured fields. The description adds no constraint, format, or matching-behavior detail beyond the schema (e.g., whether brand matching is exact, prefix, or fuzzy), so the baseline 3 applies.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'searches US drug listings by brand or generic name', and then enumerates the returned fields (labeler, NDC code, dosage form, route, marketing start date, active ingredients). It also names the sibling it is not (gov_openfda_drugsfda), so an agent can distinguish the two without reading either schema.

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?

It explicitly routes the agent to gov_openfda_drugsfda 'when you need FDA Drugs@FDA approval records from openFDA for a generic', which is a concrete alternative with a selecting condition. It does not spell out an explicit when-not-to-use case for this tool itself, but the name-search scope is clear enough that inference is minimal.

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

All SiteCheck Company Records 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.

Resources

Need Help?