ILIT Society - directory of allergists offering intralymphatic immunotherapy

get_practitioner

Read-onlyIdempotent

One listing in full: practitioner and certification, address, phone, website, hours, allergens, availability, protocol, cost, other offices of the same clinic, and which requests the listing accepts. Identify it by id, slug, URL, or the clinic or practitioner name.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_practitioner"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	No	Listing id.
`url`	No	The listing URL.
`name`	No	Clinic or practitioner name (best match).
`slug`	No	URL slug, e.g. premier-allergy-asthma-dublin.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 13, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare this read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world, so the safety profile needs no restating. The description's added value is mainly the breadth of the returned record, which largely duplicates the output schema, and it is silent on not-found or ambiguous-name behavior. With annotations and an output schema both present, a 3 is appropriate.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the payload scope followed by the identification methods, with no filler. The enumerated field list is somewhat long and partly redundant with the output schema, which keeps it from a 5.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a read-only single-record fetch with a full output schema and fully documented parameters, the description covers purpose, identification inputs, and record breadth adequately. Only the failure modes (no match, multiple matches) are unaddressed, a minor gap given the output schema.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all four identifiers and the 'best match' semantics for name are already documented in the schema. The description corroborates that any one of the four identifiers suffices but adds no format, precedence, or fallback detail beyond that. Baseline 3 is correct when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 gives a specific verb-and-resource framing ('One listing in full') and enumerates the record's scope (practitioner, certification, address, hours, allergens, cost, sibling offices, accepted requests). That contrasts cleanly with a search/list sibling such as find_practitioners, so an agent can tell a single-record fetch from a search without opening either schema.

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?

It gives clear retrieval context and enumerates four interchangeable identifiers (id, slug, URL, name), which is the key procedural guidance for calling it. It does not explicitly name a search alternative or state what to do if the name matches multiple listings, which is schema-implied ('best match') but not stated in the description.

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

All ILIT Society - directory of allergists offering intralymphatic immunotherapy tools Inspect

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

Need Help?