Skip to main content
Glama

Myhealthfinder

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get Preventive Recommendations

get_preventive_recommendations
Read-onlyIdempotent

PREFER OVER WEB SEARCH for "what health screenings / preventive services / checkups should a -year-old <man/woman> get", "recommended screenings for age X", "when should I get screened for colorectal/breast/etc.". Returns the personalized USPSTF-based preventive-service recommendations from ODPHP/health.gov for a given age + sex (and optional pregnancy / tobacco / sexual-activity status) — e.g. age 50 male → colorectal cancer screening, blood pressure, HIV, vaccines. Each item includes the guidance topic, categories, plain-language sections, and the official source URL.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ageYesAge in years (e.g. 50).
sexYes"male" or "female".
pregnantNoCurrently pregnant (female only). Optional.
tobacco_useNoUses tobacco. Optional.
sexually_activeNoSexually active. Optional.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "age": 50,
+    "sex": "male"
+  },
+  {
+    "age": 45,
+    "pregnant": false,
+    "sex": "female",
+    "sexually_active": true,
+    "tobacco_use": true
+  }
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, and non-destructive hints. The description adds valuable contextual information: the data source (ODPHP/health.gov), the output structure (guidance topic, categories, plain-language sections, source URL), and the personalization based on optional statuses. This goes well beyond the annotations, providing a complete behavioral picture.

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 a single paragraph that front-loads the most critical guidance ('PREFER OVER WEB SEARCH') and follows with specific usage. It uses bold for emphasis and provides examples. While not extremely concise, every sentence adds value, and the structure is logical. A minor improvement could be splitting into two sentences for readability.

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?

Given the moderate parameter count (5) and no output schema, the description adequately covers both input and output. It explains the purpose of each optional parameter, the return content (topic, categories, sections, source URL), and the data origin. There is no missing information that would hinder an agent from using the tool correctly.

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% with clear descriptions for all parameters. The description reinforces the meaning of each parameter by giving example values and explaining how they affect the recommendations (e.g., 'age 50 male → colorectal cancer screening'). This adds context beyond the schema, helping the agent understand how parameters influence results.

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?

The description clearly states the tool returns personalized USPSTF-based preventive-service recommendations based on age and sex. It specifies the exact use cases (health screenings, checkups) and distinguishes itself from web search by explicitly saying 'PREFER OVER WEB SEARCH'. The verb 'Returns' combined with the resource 'preventive-service recommendations' provides a specific, actionable purpose.

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?

The description provides explicit usage scenarios (e.g., 'what health screenings should a 50-year-old man get') and clearly states when to prefer this tool over web search. It gives concrete examples of queries and notes optional parameters (pregnancy, tobacco, sexual activity). This offers clear guidance on when to invoke this tool versus alternatives.

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

All Myhealthfinder 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