Skip to main content
Glama

Clinicaltables

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Icd10cm

icd10cm
Read-onlyIdempotent

"What's the ICD-10 code for [diagnosis]" / "diagnosis code lookup" / "billing code for [condition]" / "EHR code for [X]" — search ICD-10-CM diagnostic codes (US clinical modification, ~96k codes). Returns code + full description. Use for medical billing, EHR diagnosis coding, claim coding. Example: terms="diab" → E11.9 Type 2 diabetes mellitus without complications.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dfNoComma-separated display fields to use in the `displays` array. Default varies per table; usually the canonical name.
efNoComma-separated extra fields to include per match. Field names vary per table; check NLM docs at clinicaltables.nlm.nih.gov.
countNoMaximum matches to return. Default 7, max 500. Use 1–3 for typeahead UX, 20–50 for browsing.
termsYesSearch query — prefix/contains match against canonical names. Whitespace-split into AND tokens. Example: "type 2 diabetes".

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "count": 3,
+    "terms": "type 2 diabetes"
+  }
+]
  2. Changed7 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / count / default
      Added value: +7
    • addedInput schema / properties / count / description
      Added value: +"Maximum matches to return. Default 7, max 500. Use 1–3 for typeahead UX, 20–50 for browsing."
    • addedInput schema / properties / count / maximum
      Added value: +500
    • addedInput schema / properties / count / minimum
      Added value: +1
    • addedInput schema / properties / df / description
      Added value: +"Comma-separated display fields to use in the `displays` array. Default varies per table; usually the canonical name."
    • addedInput schema / properties / ef / description
      Added value: +"Comma-separated extra fields to include per match. Field names vary per table; check NLM docs at clinicaltables.nlm.nih.gov."
    • addedInput schema / properties / terms / description
      Added value: +"Search query — prefix/contains match against canonical names. Whitespace-split into AND tokens. Example: \"type 2 diabetes\"."
  3. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful behavioral detail: it returns 'code + full description', covers ~96k codes, and includes a concrete example (terms="diab" → E11.9). It does not cover pagination or sorting behavior, but those are not essential for this simple read-only lookup.

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 description is well-structured: trigger phrases, core purpose, intended use, and an example. It is slightly padded by multiple paraphrases of the same lookup intent, but the essential information is front-loaded and the example earns its place.

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?

For a read-only search tool with no output schema, the description covers the key contract: input concepts, return value ('code + full description'), domain, and a representative example. Optional display/extra-field parameters are documented in the schema, so nothing critical to a correct invocation 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 the baseline is 3 even without additional explanation. The tool description adds an illustrative terms example, but it does not add meaningful semantics for df, ef, or count beyond what the schema already documents. This is acceptable given the high schema coverage.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's function: 'search ICD-10-CM diagnostic codes' and specifies scope ('US clinical modification, ~96k codes'), plus the return shape ('code + full description'). It indirectly differentiates from the icd9cm sibling by naming ICD-10-CM, but it does not explicitly name or contrast any sibling tool, so it falls just 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 description gives explicit use contexts: 'Use for medical billing, EHR diagnosis coding, claim coding.' This tells an agent when the tool is appropriate, but it does not mention exclusions or name alternatives like icd9cm for older coding schemes or disease_names/procedures for other clinical lookups.

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

All Clinicaltables 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