Google Health MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Score Discussions Admin

Get Google Health Identity

google_health_get_identity

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve the authenticated user's Google Health identity mapping needed for Fitbit-to-Google migrations. Use it to identify and transfer the user's health data.

Instructions

Get the Google Health identity mapping for the authenticated user. Useful for Fitbit-to-Google migrations.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`privacy_mode`	No	Optional per-call privacy override. Defaults to GOOGLE_HEALTH_PRIVACY_MODE or structured. raw returns upstream Google Health JSON.
`response_format`	No		markdown
`explicit_user_intent`	No	Required true when privacy_mode=raw (agent escalation of redaction).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	Yes
`endpoint`	Yes
`privacy_mode`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.7.7Aug 29, 2026

changedInput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

changedOutput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

Changed1 schema field changedv0.7.3Aug 4, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / explicit_user_intent

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Required true when privacy_mode=raw (agent escalation of redaction).",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

First observedv0.1.3May 7, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is well covered. The description adds the identity-mapping scope and migration context, but no further behavioral details such as output shape or privacy-mode effects beyond what the schema provides.

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 tight sentences with no filler. The primary action is front-loaded, and the migration-use context is stated efficiently.

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 the strong annotations, an output schema, and zero required parameters, the description is largely sufficient. It could be slightly more complete by mentioning the optional parameters or clarifying the distinction from profile-related tools, but nothing essential is missing for basic invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool description provides no parameter-level meaning. Schema coverage is only 67%, leaving response_format undocumented in the schema, and the description does not fill that gap or clarify how privacy_mode or explicit_user_intent affect the call.

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 clearly states the verb 'Get' and the specific resource 'Google Health identity mapping for the authenticated user.' This distinguishes it from profile/settings tools, though it does not explicitly name a sibling or contrast itself with a close alternative.

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 provides a concrete use context: 'Useful for Fitbit-to-Google migrations.' However, it does not state when not to use this tool, nor does it name alternative sibling tools that might be more appropriate.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.