Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
costkits-mcp

costkits-mcp

Official
by costkits
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

find_providers

Find healthcare providers for a procedure in a US state, showing observed negotiated rates from hospital transparency data for accurate cost comparison.

Instructions

Find healthcare providers for a procedure in a US state. Each provider has pricing_status: 'observed' (real negotiated rate from hospital transparency data — prefer these), 'estimated', or 'none'. Set cluster=true for city-level groups with lat/lng.

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": {
      "procedure": "<procedure>",
      "state": "<state>"
    },
    "name": "find_providers"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax results (default 25)
stateYes2-letter US state code
clusterNoGroup by city with lat/lng (default false)
procedureYesProcedure slug or plain name

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?

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses pricing_data provenance (hospital transparency data) and behavior of cluster parameter, but does not explicitly state read-only nature or any side effects.

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, no waste. Purpose is front-loaded, and every sentence adds value. Well-structured and efficient.

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?

For a 4-parameter tool with no output schema or annotations, the description covers purpose, parameter hints, and data quality. Could mention pagination or response structure, but it's sufficient.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, but description adds meaning: explains that cluster=true groups by city with lat/lng, procedure accepts slug or plain name, and limit defaults to 25. It also clarifies pricing_status field values.

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 'Find healthcare providers for a procedure in a US state', specifying the verb (find), resource (providers), and scope. It distinguishes from siblings like analyze_bill or estimate_procedure_cost by focusing on provider search with pricing status.

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?

The description explains when to use cluster mode and notes preference for 'observed' pricing status, but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or compare it to alternatives like get_provider or list_providers.

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