Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ClinicSense MCP Server

ClinicSense MCP Server

by cotlet-connect
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

clinicsense_status

Check that your Cotlet.dev account, credits, and ClinicSense connection are ready before managing appointments or payments.

Instructions

Check that your Cotlet.dev account and ClinicSense are ready: account, credits and ClinicSense connection.

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": "clinicsense_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the three things inspected (account, credits, connection), which is meaningful behavioral context, but it never states that the call is read-only/side-effect free, whether it consumes credits, or how failures are surfaced.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that names the actor and lists the checks, with no redundant or filler wording. The enumeration is compact and immediately scannable.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple zero-parameter tool this is close to sufficient, but with no output schema the description should indicate what a result looks like (per-check pass/fail, error behavior). As written, an agent knows what is inspected but not what comes back.

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 there is no parameter meaning to convey and the baseline of 4 applies. Nothing in the description conflicts with the empty schema.

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?

The description gives a concrete verb ('Check') and enumerates the resources verified: account, credits, and ClinicSense connection. That distinguishes it from the sibling action tools (open, click, type, read), which operate on the ClinicSense UI, though it never explicitly names that 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?

The phrasing 'Check that ... are ready' implies a pre-flight/diagnostic use, which is useful implied guidance. However, there is no explicit statement of when to call it (e.g., before starting a workflow), and no mention of what to do if the check fails or which sibling to use instead.

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