cliniko_list_practitionersList practitioners in the account. GET /practitioners.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | Page number (1-based). Default 1. | |
| per_page | No | Results per page (max 100). Default 50. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
readOnlyHint=true already covers the read-only nature. The description adds the GET method and account scope, but discloses no further behavioral traits such as pagination or response format beyond what the schema provides.
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 short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose ('List practitioners in the account') and followed by the endpoint reference. No wasted words.
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-only list tool with two optional, well-documented pagination parameters and no output schema, the description is sufficient. The account scope is stated, and the endpoint reinforces the behavior, though response details are left unspecified.
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 100% with both page and per_page already described. The description adds no additional meaning about either parameter, so it meets the schema baseline.
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?
States the verb 'List' with the resource 'practitioners' and scope 'in the account', backed by the HTTP endpoint GET /practitioners. This unambiguously distinguishes it from sibling list tools for appointments, patients, invoices, etc.
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 when-to-use or alternative guidance is provided. The description only states what the tool does, so usage context is implicit from the name and sibling set rather than stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct resource-action pair such as patients, appointments, invoices, treatment notes, or availability. Even the two availability tools are clearly separated by description: list_available_times returns multiple slots while next_available_time returns one.
Tools consistently use the cliniko_ prefix with get_, list_, or create_ verbs before a resource name. The only notable deviation is cliniko_next_available_time, which lacks an explicit verb, but the overall pattern remains predictable and easy to navigate.
At 17 tools, the server is on the higher end but still reasonable for a practice-management API covering account info, businesses, practitioners, patients, appointments, invoices, treatment notes, products, and availability. Each tool maps to a meaningful endpoint, though next_available_time could be seen as partially redundant with list_available_times.
The core booking workflow is covered well: clients can look up availability and create appointments, and patient lookup is supported. However, there are no update, delete, or cancel operations for appointments or patients, and invoices and treatment notes are read-only, leaving notable lifecycle gaps.