SiteCheck Company Records

HealthData.gov dataset catalogue: dataset ID, name, short

gov_healthdata

Read-only

HealthData.gov (HHS) dataset catalogue: dataset ID, name, short description, display type, last rows update and dataset link, for a search term. Catalogue metadata only; some datasets are non-tabular and have no row API. Related tools on this server, for a different need: gov_data_gov_uk when you need UK government open datasets from the data.gov.uk catalogue; gov_clinicaltrials when you need ClinicalTrials.gov studies matching a condition, drug. 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": "gov_healthdata"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`q`	Yes	Search text, 2 to 80 characters
`limit`	No	Datasets to return, 1 to 10 (default 5)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`query`	No
`source`	No
`datasets`	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?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the description need not restate safety. It adds real behavior beyond them: catalogue metadata only, some datasets non-tabular with no row API, per-call price of $0.002 USDC via x402 on Base/Solana/Arc, and that failed calls are not charged — the cost and failure-charging disclosure is the kind of thing an agent cannot get from any structured field. It stops short of describing result quality or pagination behavior.

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 with the resource and returned fields, then caveat, then alternatives, then price — a sensible order with no filler. The pricing sentence is long but carries information an agent needs before calling; the only mild redundancy is restating the server relationship in the alternatives clause.

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 two-parameter, read-only search tool with a full schema and an output schema, the description covers what is missing from structured data: domain scope, metadata-only limitation, non-tabular caveat, cost model, and sibling routing. Nothing an agent needs to select or invoke it correctly is absent.

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% and both parameters (q with a 2–80 character constraint, limit with a 1–10 range and default) are documented in the schema itself. The description adds no syntax, tokenization, or query-format guidance beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 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 names a specific resource (HealthData.gov/HHS dataset catalogue), enumerates exactly what is returned (dataset ID, name, short description, display type, last rows update, dataset link), and states the input is a search term. It also sets scope with 'Catalogue metadata only', so an agent knows this is a search/listing tool over metadata rather than a data-row fetch.

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 to alternatives with conditions: gov_data_gov_uk 'when you need UK government open datasets' and gov_clinicaltrials 'when you need ClinicalTrials.gov studies matching a condition, drug'. What is missing is a positive framing of when this tool wins over the unmentioned sibling gov_data_gov, but the when-to-prefer-others guidance is clear.

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?