HealthLedger MCP

Search records

search_records

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search health records using case-insensitive substring matching across all stored domains. Filter results by user and set a limit for efficient retrieval.

Instructions

Full-text-ish search across stored health domains (case-insensitive substring).

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": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "search_records"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`user`	No
`limit`	No
`query`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Jul 9, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. Description adds that it's 'Full-text-ish' (not true full-text) and case-insensitive, providing behavioral nuance 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.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Single sentence with no waste, but could be more structured. It earns its place but lacks front-loading of key details.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the presence of an output schema, the description is minimally adequate but doesn't explain what 'health domains' are or the scope of the search. With 3 parameters, it's somewhat incomplete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate but only mentions the search behavior (case-insensitive substring), ignoring the 'user' and 'limit' parameters entirely. The query parameter is implied, but not explicitly detailed.

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 clearly states 'search across stored health domains' with specifics like 'case-insensitive substring'. It distinguishes from sibling 'semantic_search' by implying this is basic substring matching.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No explicit guidance on when to use this vs alternatives like 'semantic_search'. The description implies usage for simple, case-insensitive substring searches but doesn't provide context or exclusions.

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

Deploy Server