Skip to main content
Glama

WebDiet

by io.github.mcp-dir
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

webdiet_anamnese

Read-onlyIdempotent

List all anamnesis records for a WebDiet patient WITH the full Q/A content. Each item carries:

  • id, titulo, data

  • texto → plain-text Q/A (readable, line-broken — best for AI consumption / RAG)

  • texto_html → original HTML (......) preserved for rich rendering

  • interpretacao / interpretacao_html → nutritionist's notes when present WebDiet stores the answers as URL-encoded HTML (questionanswer); this tool decodes both representations so the agent can read e.g. food frequency, complaints, goals, allergies for the patient. For pre-consultation questionnaire responses NOT yet linked to a patient, use webdiet_preconsulta action=list_responses.

Bulk support: accepts patient_ids for batched execution.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
accountNo
patient_idYes
patient_idsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. Description adds that it decodes URL-encoded HTML and provides both plain-text and HTML representations. No contradiction with 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?

Description is relatively concise with a few sentences and bullet points. Front-loaded with main action. Includes some internal data representation details that could be trimmed, 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?

No output schema provided, but description explains return fields adequately. Covers main use case, bulk support, and decoding behavior. Sufficient for a read-only tool.

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 has 3 params with 0% description coverage. Description adds meaning by explaining patient_id is required and patient_ids for batched execution, but does not detail the account parameter. Compensates somewhat but not fully.

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 clearly states it lists anamnesis records with full Q/A content, specifies returned fields, and distinguishes from sibling tool webdiet_preconsulta.

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?

Explicitly says when to use vs. webdiet_preconsulta for not-yet-linked responses, and mentions bulk support via patient_ids. Does not explicitly state when not to use, but context is clear.

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

All WebDiet 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