Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Google Health MCP

Google Health MCP

by davidmosiah
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Google Health Quickstart

google_health_quickstart
Read-onlyIdempotent

Walks you through the Google Health connection with a personalized 3-step setup that adapts to what's already configured.

Instructions

Personalized 3-step setup walkthrough for the human user. Adapts to current state (env vars set? token present? what's next?). Call this first when the user asks 'how do I connect Google Health?'

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": "google_health_quickstart"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
response_formatNomarkdown

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.7.7
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  2. Addedv0.5.1

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds beyond that by revealing the tool is adaptive ('Adapts to current state') and that it is for the human user, not the agent. These are useful behavioral details not present in annotations.

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?

Three short sentences, each adding distinct value: what it is, how it adapts, and when to call it. The most actionable trigger is front-loaded at the end but clearly emphasized. There is no redundant or filler content.

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 simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose, adaptive behavior, and call trigger. The only notable gap is the absence of any guidance on the response_format parameter, though the schema's enum and default limit the ambiguity.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not mention response_format at all. The schema provides an enum and default, so the parameter is somewhat self-explanatory, but the description adds no extra meaning and does not compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'setup walkthrough for the human user' with a concrete structure ('3-step'). It also provides a trigger phrase, 'Call this first when the user asks 'how do I connect Google Health?'', which clearly differentiates this from sibling tools like get_auth_url or connection_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?

It gives an explicit when-to-use condition ('Call this first when the user asks...'). However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when NOT to use this tool, so it falls just short of the top score.

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