Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official

healthgrades_health_article

Fetch a Healthgrades Health A-Z article's headline, authors, reviewers, dates, tags, and body as structured sections, supporting standard, chaptered, and slideshow formats via US egress.

Instructions

Get a Healthgrades Health A-Z article. Returns one Healthgrades Health A-Z or drug article: headline, description, authors, medical reviewers, published and modified dates, image, the conditions the article is tagged with, and the article body as headed sections of paragraphs and lists. Works for standard, chaptered, and slideshow articles. Requests use US egress because Healthgrades restricts content by region.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesArticle URL from /healthgrades/health-articles

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.17.9

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses that requests use US egress due to regional content restrictions and that it handles three article layouts. It does not mention authentication needs, rate limits, or failure modes, keeping it short of a 5.

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-loads the core action, then enumerates the returned fields and the supported article types. Sentences are dense and largely earn their place, though the return-field enumeration is somewhat long relative to the single-parameter call.

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?

There is no output schema, but the description compensates by listing the returned fields (headline, authors, reviewers, dates, image, tags, body structure). Combined with the regional-egress note, an agent has enough to call it correctly; only auth/error context is missing.

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?

With a single parameter at 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents the URL and its source. The description adds no syntax, format, or validation detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource ('Get a Healthgrades Health A-Z article') and clarifies the scope covers both A-Z and drug articles in standard, chaptered, and slideshow formats. It is plainly the detail tool versus the sibling list tool, but it never names that sibling to sharpen the contrast.

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?

Usage is implied: the parameter is documented as an 'Article URL from /healthgrades/health-articles', which routes the agent to the listing sibling. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance or statement of prerequisites beyond that implicit pointer.

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