Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
costkits-mcp

costkits-mcp

Official
by costkits
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

demo_estimate

Retrieve a static sample cost estimate for a colonoscopy in Connecticut to verify API connectivity and inspect the response format. No API key required.

Instructions

Static sample cost estimate (colonoscopy in Connecticut) from the CostKits API. Works with NO API key — use it to verify connectivity and see the response shape.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

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

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries the burden. It mentions it's a static sample (fixed data) and requires no authentication, setting expectations for behavior. It could add more details about the response but is sufficient for the tool's simplicity.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words, front-loaded with purpose and key usage details.

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?

Given it's a demo with no output schema and 0 parameters, the description covers the essential purpose and use case sufficiently. It could mention the limitation of being a single sample, but it's complete enough.

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?

Input schema has 0 parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. Baseline is 4; description adds context that it's a fixed sample, which is adequate.

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 the tool provides a static sample cost estimate for a colonoscopy in Connecticut from the CostKits API, immediately distinguishing it from other tools by being a demo that requires no API key.

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?

It explicitly states it works with no API key and is for verifying connectivity and seeing response shape, implying it's for testing/setup. However, it does not explicitly say when not to use it (e.g., for real cost estimates) or compare with siblings.

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