ProDoctor MCP Server
Related Servers
Alternatives to ProDoctor MCP Server
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseCqualityBmaintenanceExposes the Feegow clinic management API as MCP tools for agents, enabling scheduling, patient management, and more via natural language.97MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceExposes tools from the Ecuro Light API for managing clinical appointments, patient records, and clinic availability. It enables users to perform healthcare management tasks such as scheduling, patient search, and report generation through MCP-compatible clients.-
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceExposes the BrasilAPI as MCP tools, enabling AI agents to query Brazilian public data such as CEP, CNPJ, DDD, IBGE, banks, PIX, FIPE, NCM, exchange rates, taxes, weather, CVM information, holidays, ISBN, domains, stock tickers, and TUSS.41Apache 2.0
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables AI agents to manage doctor appointments by creating, finding, checking status, canceling, and rescheduling appointments through an MCP server that connects to an external appointment REST API.-
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceExposes appointment scheduling and insurance claims data as MCP tools, allowing AI clients to query and update clinic records via a standard protocol.-
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceMCP server for real-time querying of the Bradesco Saude referenced network, exposing a search_providers tool to search for doctors, hospitals, clinics, and labs.-
TDQS
Scored across 18 tools
Each tool targets a distinct action on specific entities (agenda, paciente, procedimento, tabela, usuario). Even within the appointment group, verbs like alterar, buscar, desmarcar, detalhar, excluir, horarios_livres, inserir, listar are clearly separated. No two tools have overlapping purposes.
All tools follow a consistent snake_case pattern with an entity prefix followed by a verb or verb_noun (e.g., agenda_inserir_agendamento, paciente_detalhar). No mixing of conventions or cases.
18 tools cover the main operations of a medical scheduling system: appointments (10), patients (3), procedures (3), procedure tables (1), and users (2). The count is well-scoped for the domain without being excessive or insufficient.
Appointment lifecycle is fully covered (CRUD, status changes, free slots). However, patient management lacks creation and update tools (only list, search, detail). Procedure and user tools also miss creation/update/deletion. These gaps hinder complete workflow automation.