Skip to main content
Glama

check_interactions_multi

Pairwise interaction check across a list of drugs (polypharmacy). Returns one entry per unordered pair (dedupes A-B/B-A). Limit 8 drugs (= 28 pairs).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
drugsYes

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Clearly states deduplication of unordered pairs and maximum input size. Could add details on error handling or response format, but basic behavior is well covered.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose and key behavior (dedup, limit). No wasted words.

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?

Given no output schema and moderate complexity, the description covers the essential behavior and constraints. Minor gap: could briefly mention what the returned entries look like or edge cases like invalid drugs.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With schema coverage at 0%, description fully explains the 'drugs' parameter: it's a list of drugs for pairwise checking, with a limit of 8. Adds meaning beyond the schema's type constraints.

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?

Description explicitly states it performs pairwise interaction checks for multiple drugs (polypharmacy) and returns deduplicated pairs. Clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like check_interaction which likely handles single pairs.

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?

Provides clear limit of 8 drugs (28 pairs) and implies when not to use (e.g., single drug). However, lacks explicit mention of alternatives or when to prefer sibling tools.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a distinct purpose: single pair, multi-pair, and name normalization. No overlap or ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (check_interaction, check_interactions_multi, normalize_drug_name).

Tool Count5/5

Three tools are well-scoped for a drug interaction checker: one for single pairs, one for batch checks, and one for name resolution.

Completeness4/5

Covers the core workflow: name lookup, single interaction, and batch interaction. Missing a tool to retrieve all interactions for a drug, but the multi tool can handle it with multiple calls.