Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

goodrx_conditions

Retrieve GoodRx health conditions with names, slugs, URLs, and medication availability flags. If the source is unreachable, a retained copy up to about a day old is returned.

Instructions

List GoodRx health conditions. Lists the health conditions in GoodRx's conditions directory, with each condition's name, slug and GoodRx URL. has_medications tells you whether GoodRx publishes a medications list for that condition. If GoodRx is unreachable, a retained copy up to about a day old is returned and flagged with an X-Availability-Mode: stale header.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.17.9

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and mostly succeeds: it discloses the field set (name, slug, URL, has_medications) and, valuably, the fallback behavior when GoodRx is unreachable — a ~1-day-old retained copy flagged via an X-Availability-Mode: stale header. It doesn't mention auth or rate limits, but for a public read-only directory that is minor.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

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

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, then output fields, then degradation behavior. No filler, and the most decision-relevant facts come first.

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

Completeness5/5

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

No output schema exists, so describing the returned fields and the stale-fallback header is exactly the missing context an agent needs. For a zero-parameter read-only directory tool, the definition is complete.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool takes zero parameters, so per the baseline the description is not required to explain inputs. It instead documents the output shape (name, slug, URL, has_medications), which is beyond the schema but does not concern parameters.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (GoodRx health conditions / conditions directory) and enumerates the returned fields, making the scope clear. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from the singular detail sibling goodrx_condition, so an agent still has to infer that this is the directory listing rather than a detail fetch.

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?

The description implies usage (enumerate the whole conditions directory) but never states when to prefer this over goodrx_condition, goodrx_condition_drugs, goodrx_classes or the other goodrx listing tools nearby. Context is implied only, with no exclusions or alternatives named.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools