Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Il Medical Exclusions

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Il Medical Exclusion Coverage

il_medical_exclusion_coverage
Read-onlyIdempotent

What the Illinois HFS OIG Provider Sanctions list covers and how current it is: total rows, counts by action type (Terminated, Barred, Exclusion, Suspended, Voluntary Withdrawal), how many carry an NPI or license number, oldest and newest action date, and the capture date. Use to check the screening data is fresh enough before a compliance decision. Pass year (e.g. 2025) or start_date/end_date to instead COUNT how many sanction actions have an action date in that year or range, counted over the whole list rather than a page, with the count split by action type. The response names the date field counted (action_date, HFS's Action Date). 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": "il_medical_exclusion_coverage"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
yearNoCount records whose date field falls in this calendar year (e.g. 2025), counted over the WHOLE list, not a page. Ignored if start_date/end_date are given.
end_dateNoInclusive range end, YYYY-MM-DD. Use with start_date for a custom date range instead of a calendar year.
start_dateNoInclusive range start, YYYY-MM-DD. Use with end_date for a custom date range instead of a calendar year.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only/idempotent safety, but the description adds real context: counting is done over the whole list rather than a page, the response names the date field counted (action_date, HFS's Action Date), the data is keyless, and its source is Illinois HFS OIG. It doesn't discuss refresh cadence beyond the capture date or rate limits, but it does not contradict 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?

Front-loads what the tool covers, then the counting mode, then sourcing. It is a bit dense and repeats the schema's year/range precedence, but every sentence carries useful information and there is no filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description fully describes what comes back: totals, per-action-type counts, NPI/license coverage, date extrema, capture date, and the named date field. It also flags whole-list scope and the keyless source, which is everything needed to call it correctly.

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 coverage is 100% and each parameter already documents year vs start_date/end_date semantics, including that year is ignored when a range is given. The description restates the same precedence rule with only the added example (2025), so it adds marginal value beyond the schema.

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: it reports what the Illinois HFS OIG Provider Sanctions list covers (total rows, counts by action type, NPI/license coverage, oldest/newest action date, capture date) and that it can instead count actions within a year or date range over the whole list. An agent can tell this is a dataset-profile/counting tool, not a per-provider lookup.

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?

Gives a clear use case ('check the screening data is fresh enough before a compliance decision') and explains when to pass year vs start_date/end_date versus calling with no params. It stops short of naming the sibling il_medical_check_exclusion or stating when not to use this tool.

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