California Assisted Living Waiver MCP server
Related Servers
Alternatives to California Assisted Living Waiver MCP server
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceA remote MCP server that lets an LLM explore, query, aggregate, and benchmark the ~234 datasets in the CMS Provider Data Catalog — hospitals, dialysis facilities, nursing homes, home health, hospice, physicians, and more — in plain language.AGPL 3.0
- FlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceAn unofficial MCP server that exposes public FedRAMP 20x documentation as deterministic, citable lookup tools for AI assistants, with every response citing the exact upstream source.7-

mcp-medprice-aiofficial
FlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceA hosted MCP server exposing US hospital chargemaster cost data to AI assistants.-- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceAn MCP server for searching healthcare providers in the US National Provider Identifier (NPI) Registry, enabling natural language queries for provider data in MCP-compatible AI assistants.Apache 2.0
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceRead-only MCP server providing a validated public preview of behavioral-health NPIs newly present in CMS pending first-time Medicare enrollment files, including state/specialty counts and official methodology.MIT
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceAn MCP server that enables AI assistants to query U.S. FDA public datasets, including drug adverse events, labeling, recalls, approvals, shortages, NDC directory, and medical device regulatory information.10MIT
TDQS
Scored across 5 tools
Each tool targets a distinct concern: program-level stats, county listing, county details, facility search, and methodology. The two county tools (list_counties vs get_county_summary) are related but list_counties aggregates all counties while get_county_summary drills into one, and their descriptions clarify the distinction. Overall clear separation.
Tools generally follow verb_noun pattern (get_program_summary, list_counties, get_county_summary, search_facilities, get_methodology_and_citation), all using snake_case with descriptive verbs. Minor inconsistency: get_methodology_and_citation is longer and compounds two nouns, but the naming is otherwise consistent and readable.
Five tools is a reasonable, focused surface for a domain-specific reference server. The scope is narrow (a single waiver program), so five tools are neither sparse nor bloated. Slightly on the lean side but appropriate for the read-only data-provider purpose.
The surface covers program overview, county-level navigation, facility search, and methodology/citation—a coherent read-only reference workflow with no dead ends. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no tool for provider-level detail beyond the top-five, no county-to-facility cross-filtering), but agents can accomplish core lookup tasks fully.