Search Vascue's public healthcare-operations, insurance-claims and clinic-booking documentation. Public content only; never send patient data, credentials or booking requests.
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Average 4.3/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.
With only one tool, there is no overlap or ambiguity between tools. The single 'search' tool is clearly the only option for querying the knowledge base, so differentiation is trivial.
The tool name 'search' is a clear, imperative verb that directly matches the server's purpose of public knowledge search. There are no other tools to create naming inconsistencies, so the pattern is technically consistent.
The server contains exactly one tool, which is on the low end of typical MCP server sizes. While the narrow scope of 'search' might justify a single tool, it feels thin for a knowledge base covering multiple documentation domains.
The tool provides search functionality, but lacks any complementary operations like retrieving a specific document, listing categories, or getting more details from a search result. This could be a notable gap if agents need to access full document content, though the search results might suffice for basic Q&A.
searchAInspectSearch Vascue's public healthcare-operations, insurance-claims, clinic-booking, security, case-study, and product documentation. Use this for public product questions only. Never send patient information, claim documents, clinic credentials, or booking requests.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | The input query. | |
| ai_search_options | No | Options for customizing the AI search behavior. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses that the tool only handles public documentation and explicitly warns against sending sensitive data, which implies it does not process private data. However, it doesn't mention other behaviors like result limits, authentication needs, or whether queries are stored. Still, the core behavioral trait (public-only) is well covered.
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 only two sentences, front-loading the primary purpose and immediately following with a clear usage restriction. Every word contributes meaning, with no filler or redundancy. It's an exemplar of concise, well-structured tool documentation.
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?
While the description covers the core purpose and usage boundaries, it lacks guidance on the tool's output format or how to effectively utilize the extensive ai_search_options parameters. Given the tool's complexity (nested options for caching, reranking, retrieval, query rewriting) and the absence of an output schema, the description should offer more context on expected results or parameter usage to be complete. It is adequate but leaves gaps for an agent needing to leverage the full capabilities.
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 schema provides descriptions for both parameters ('The input query.' and 'Options for customizing the AI search behavior.'), giving 100% coverage. The description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema states. The nested structure of ai_search_options is complex but the description does not offer any guidance on how to use these options effectively, so it neither enhances nor substantially compensates for the schema's generic coverage.
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 identifies the tool's function: searching Vascue's public documentation across multiple specific domains (healthcare-operations, insurance-claims, etc.). The verb 'search' and the resource 'public documentation' are explicit, and it's unambiguous what the tool does. Even without sibling tools, the purpose is distinct and specific.
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 provides explicit usage guidance: 'Use this for public product questions only.' It then lists what to never send (patient information, claim documents, clinic credentials, booking requests), which effectively defines when not to use the tool and what inputs are prohibited. This is clear, direct, and leaves no ambiguity about appropriate usage.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
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
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!
