Skip to main content
Glama

Medicine: FDA label, recalls, shortages, pharmacy cost

check_medicine
Read-only

Returns official records for a medicine from its brand or generic name (e.g. 'Advil', 'metformin'). For Canada: product identification, ingredients, status, company, schedule, route and form. For an EU or EEA country: the European Medicines Agency's authorisation, what it is approved for, shortages and safety letters. For the US (the default): whether it is over the counter or prescription, what the FDA label says it is for, its boxed warning and key warnings, a link to the full label (DailyMed), FDA recall reports, current FDA drug shortages, and what US pharmacies pay per tablet for each strength (CMS NADAC), brand next to generic. With with set to a second medicine, the result includes the label sentences where either label names the other; the absence of a mention is not evidence about safety. Applies to questions about what official records say about a medicine: its label, recalls, shortages or pharmacy cost. Not medical advice. Foods and medical devices are outside this result.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

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

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesBrand or generic name, e.g. 'Advil' or 'metformin'
withNoOptional second medicine name; the result lists label sentences in either label that name the other
countryNoCountry whose regulator is used: Canada uses Canadian product records; an EU or EEA country uses the European Medicines Agency; the US (the default) uses the FDA

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / country / description
      Previous value: -"Country whose regulator is used: an EU or EEA country uses the European Medicines Agency; the US (the default) uses the FDA"New value: +"Country whose regulator is used: Canada uses Canadian product records; an EU or EEA country uses the European Medicines Agency; the US (the default) uses the FDA"
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / country / description
      Previous value: -"Where the person lives; an EU or EEA country uses the European Medicines Agency instead of the FDA"New value: +"Country whose regulator is used: an EU or EEA country uses the European Medicines Agency; the US (the default) uses the FDA"
    • changedInput schema / properties / with / description
      Previous value: -"A second medicine the person takes, to look for in both labels"New value: +"Optional second medicine name; the result lists label sentences in either label that name the other"
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / country
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Where the person lives; an EU or EEA country uses the European Medicines Agency instead of the FDA",
      +  "maxLength": 60,
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
  4. Added

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true), so the description is free to add regulatory scope, the US default, and the important caveat that 'the absence of a mention is not evidence about safety' for the `with` lookup. It does not say what happens when a name is unknown or ambiguous, which is the main residual gap for an open-world lookup.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then region-by-region detail, then scope limits — a sensible order for scanning. It is dense but nearly every clause carries factual payload; the only mild waste is the title-like restatement of the record types in the opening sentence.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing returns and does so thoroughly per region (label purpose, boxed warnings, DailyMed link, recalls, shortages, NADAC prices, brand vs generic). Missing only error/not-found behavior and any hint about result size, which matters for an open-world lookup tool.

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 coverage is 100%, so all three parameters are already documented, which sets the baseline at 3. The description does add real meaning beyond the schema by explaining that `country` selects a different regulator and dataset (Canada / EMA / FDA default) and that `with` returns cross-mentioning label sentences, but it does not clarify name matching behavior such as brand vs generic resolution or fallback.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Returns official records for a medicine') and then enumerates the exact record types returned per regulator region. An agent can distinguish it from check_food, check_recalls and check_trials without opening the 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?

Explicitly frames the applicable questions ('what official records say about a medicine: its label, recalls, shortages or pharmacy cost') and gives hard exclusions ('Not medical advice. Foods and medical devices are outside this result'). It stops short of naming the sibling tools an agent should use instead for food or device queries, so routing is implied rather than directed.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources