Public catalog, company & B2B distribution info for Mid-Continental Dental Supply (Renew line).
Get Mid-Continental Dental Supply's public company information: name, tagline, description, founding year (1984), Winnipeg (Manitoba, Canada) address, geo, phone/toll-free numbers, email and social profiles.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| locale | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is clear. The description adds transparency by listing specific return fields (founding year, address, etc.) and stating it returns public info. No contradictions.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Single sentence is concise, well-structured, and front-loaded with the tool's purpose. No unnecessary information.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With one optional parameter and no output schema, the description adequately lists expected return fields. It is complete enough for a simple read tool, though it could clarify output format.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain the optional locale parameter or its enum values. The description fails to add meaning beyond the schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool retrieves 'Mid-Continental Dental Supply's public company information' and lists specific fields (name, tagline, description, etc.), providing a specific verb+resource. It is distinct from siblings like get_distribution_info and list_products.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to use get_distribution_info instead). It does not mention exclusions or prerequisites.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Get how to buy Renew products: the B2B distribution model (available exclusively through dental professionals, not in retail stores), the countries served, professional free-sample availability, and the where-to-buy / distributors / free-sample entry points with canonical URLs.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| locale | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds context beyond readOnlyHint annotation by detailing the specific types of information returned (distribution model, countries, free samples, entry points). No contradictions 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.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single sentence that front-loads the main purpose and lists components, but it is somewhat long and could be split for clarity.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given one optional parameter and no output schema, the description provides a reasonable overview of return content, though it lacks detail on exact data structure or potential additional fields.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The locale parameter is an enum with no description in the schema. The description mentions 'countries served' but does not clarify how locale affects output (e.g., language vs. country filtering), leaving ambiguity.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool retrieves distribution information for Renew products, including specific aspects like B2B model, countries, free samples, and entry points. It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_company_info and get_product.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies usage for obtaining distribution details but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_company_info or when it would be inappropriate.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Get public catalog details for a Renew product: description, use/appliance compatibility, public feature highlights, packaging/availability, regulatory status, manufacturer, country of origin and canonical URL. Returns no ingredient, formula or chemical data (none exists in the catalog).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | ||
| locale | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate read-only. The description adds value by explicitly listing returned fields and stating what is excluded (no ingredient data), providing clear behavioral context beyond annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence front-loads what the tool returns, and the second clarifies an important exclusion.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple read operation with enums and no output schema, the description adequately specifies return fields and exclusions. It is missing optionality info for locale but is otherwise complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 0%, meaning no parameter descriptions in schema. The description does not explain the 'slug' or 'locale' parameters; the enum values are the only clues. This is insufficient for a 2-parameter tool.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool retrieves public catalog details for a Renew product, listing specific fields. It distinguishes from siblings like list_products by focusing on a single product identified by slug.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies use when needing product details but does not explicitly contrast with siblings or state when not to use. No alternative recommendations are provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
List Mid-Continental Dental Supply's Renew product line (public catalog). Returns slug, name, short description, regulatory status and the canonical mid-continental.com URL for each product.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| locale | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so the description's mention of 'public catalog' adds light context. However, it omits behavioral details like pagination, rate limits, or any preconditions, leaving the agent to infer safety from annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Single sentence with clear verb ('List'), specific subject ('Renew product line'), and concise list of return fields. No unnecessary words, well front-loaded.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Despite listing return fields, the description fails to explain the optional locale parameter, which is critical for correct invocation. No mention of possible limits or pagination, leaving gaps for a proper usage understanding.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The lone parameter 'locale' is not described at all. With 0% schema description coverage, the agent has no guidance on what locales mean or how to use them, making the parameter opaque.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description specifies exactly what is listed ('Mid-Continental Dental Supply's Renew product line') and what fields are returned (slug, name, short description, regulatory status, canonical URL). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like get_product (single product) and get_company_info (company info).
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies it is for listing the public catalog, but does not mention when not to use it or provide context for choosing between sibling tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
get_company_infoget_distribution_infoget_productlist_productsClaiming proves that you control a remote MCP connector. It does not move, proxy, or interrupt the server.
Open the connector listing, choose Claim ownership, and sign in to Glama.
Complete one verification method:
GitHub identity — fastest for official registry listings. For a namespace such as io.github.alice/server, link the matching GitHub user, then choose Claim with GitHub. An organization namespace such as io.github.acme/server also needs that organization to have installed the Glama AI GitHub App and approved its permissions, because GitHub discloses organization membership only to apps it has installed. Use HTTP or DNS when it has not.
HTTP challenge — works when you can deploy a public file. Generate a token, publish the exact JSON Glama shows at /.well-known/glama.json on the same origin as the connector, then choose Check HTTP challenge.
DNS challenge — works when you control DNS but cannot change the server. Generate a token, create the exact TXT record Glama shows, wait for it to propagate, then choose Check DNS challenge.
After verification, Glama sends a confirmation email and gives you access to listing details, thumbnails, health checks, and analytics. Keep the HTTP file or DNS record in place: Glama periodically checks it and ownership remains verified while the token is discoverable.
The HTTP ownership file has this structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"claim": "glama_claim_..."
}Claim tokens are opaque, stable, and bound to the signed-in Glama account. They contain no email address or other personal information. If Glama can no longer discover a verified HTTP or DNS token, it starts a seven-day grace period before removing claim-based access. Restore the same token during that period to keep ownership verified. Never publish an email address, Glama session token, GitHub token, or connector credential as ownership proof.
If verification fails, confirm that you copied the current token exactly. The HTTP file must be public, return valid JSON with a successful HTTP response, and stay on the connector's origin. DNS changes may need more time to propagate. A claim cannot transfer to a different origin or hostname: if the connector target changes, Glama starts the grace period and the new target must be claimed separately after the previous claim is released.
For a connector linked to the official MCP Registry, registry updates continue to replace its name, description, and URL by default. After claiming, open Manage connector and enable Use Glama listing details as the source of truth if edits made on Glama should be preserved. Categories and thumbnails are always managed on Glama; registry linkage and technical connection settings continue to sync.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
To improve your MCP server's ranking:
Claim ownership of the server listing
Complete the server profile with an accurate description and thumbnail
Provide a test profile so Glama can connect to and evaluate the server
Keep tool definitions clear and complete to earn a high Tool Definition Quality Score (TDQS)
Route real usage through the Glama Gateway; more recorded successful server uses also improve the ranking
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!
Public Root Data dental analytics directory for DSOs, dental practices, blog, and FAQ tools.
Read-only MCP: US dental intel, all-category Medicaid fee schedules, dentist lookup. Free tier.
Federal contracts, FDA recalls, business registrations, Amazon products — B2B intel.
Search ProtoClinical's current K-beauty catalog and manage buyer-approved carts and checkouts.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct aspect: company info, distribution info, product details, and product listing. No overlapping purposes, so an agent can clearly differentiate them.
All tool names follow the verb_noun pattern using snake_case (get_company_info, get_distribution_info, get_product, list_products). Consistent and predictable naming.
Four tools is appropriate for a focused server providing public information about a dental supply company and its products. The count is slightly low but well-scoped for the purpose.
The tool set covers the core public-facing aspects: company info, distribution, product listing and details. Missing search or filtering capabilities, but for a simple catalog, it's reasonably complete.
