Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Il Medical Exclusions

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Il Medical Check Exclusion

il_medical_check_exclusion
Read-onlyIdempotent

Is this healthcare provider sanctioned or excluded from the Illinois Medicaid program? Screens a person or business name, an NPI, and/or a license number against the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services (HFS) Office of Inspector General Provider Sanctions list: the state-level counterpart to the federal HHS OIG LEIE (leie pack) for Illinois, and sibling of tx_medical_check_exclusion, ny_omig_check_exclusion, ca_medical_check_exclusion and fl_medical_check_exclusion. Answers "is this provider barred from Illinois Medicaid", "check this NPI against the Illinois sanctions list", or pre-payment/credentialing screening for an Illinois Medicaid provider. An NPI or license-number match is an IDENTIFICATION; a name match, even an exact one, is a CANDIDATE lead only (the list has no date of birth). Each match carries the action type (Terminated, Barred, Exclusion, Suspended, Voluntary Withdrawal), the action date, provider type and any affiliated business. The response leads with counts by action type. No street addresses are served. Sourced from the Illinois HFS OIG, keyless.

Example tool call

This call uses example arguments supplied in the tool’s input schema.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "name": "Alrifai Tamer"
    },
    "name": "il_medical_check_exclusion"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
npiNoThe provider's 10-digit NPI, if known. An NPI match is an identification. Always pass it when known.
nameNoProvider or business name to screen, e.g. "Alrifai Tamer" or "Royal Transportation". Any word order.
limitNoMaximum matches to return (default 10, max 50).
licenseNoIllinois professional license number, if known. A license match is an identification.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond that — the identification-vs-candidate-lead distinction, absence of DOB and street addresses, the fields each match carries, and that it is keyless. However, it does not cover pagination or result ordering beyond 'counts by action type', so with strong annotation coverage a 3 is fair rather than higher.

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 core question and the data source, then semantics, then return shape. It is dense but mostly earns its length; the sibling enumeration and repeated phrasing of the 'excluded from Illinois Medicaid' question add some redundancy that could be trimmed.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must carry return-value meaning, and it does: counts by action type lead the response, each match includes action type (Terminated, Barred, Exclusion, Suspended, Voluntary Withdrawal), action date, provider type and affiliated business, with no street addresses. Nothing an agent needs to interpret results is missing.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% and each parameter already documents itself, so the baseline is 3. The description earns extra credit by explaining why NPI/license should be passed (an NPI or license match is an identification, a name match is only a lead), which is semantic guidance the schema alone does not convey.

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?

States a specific verb and resource — screens a name/NPI/license against the Illinois HFS OIG Provider Sanctions list — and explicitly positions itself as the state counterpart to the federal LEIE and sibling of tx_/ny_/ca_/fl_ exclusion checks. An agent can select it without opening the schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Enumerates concrete use cases (pre-payment/credentialing screening, 'is this provider barred from Illinois Medicaid', NPI check) and routes the agent to the federal and other-state siblings by naming them. It also sets the interpretive rule for match quality, which shapes when results should be trusted.

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

All Il Medical Exclusions 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