Skip to main content
Glama
espirado

Claims desk MCP Server

by espirado
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Related Servers

Alternatives to Claims desk MCP Server

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • mcp-medicare-coverage

      pipeworx-io
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables searching and retrieving Medicare coverage policies including National and Local Coverage Determinations, National Coverage Analyses, and recent CMS coverage changes.
      9
      MIT

    • mymedi-ai-mcp-server

      MyMedi-AI
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Healthcare billing AI for agents — 12 tools for ICD-10/CPT/HCPCS code lookup (80K+ codes), prior auth prediction, medical NER, claims validation, HIPAA compliance auditing, and provider/drug enrichment. Pay-per-call via credits or USDC.
      20
      218
      2
      MIT

    • CoverageUnlocked MCP Server

      edgeedgehq
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables AI assistants to analyze insurance denial appeals, providing win probabilities, appeal strategies, payer behavioral intelligence, and regulatory leverage for any CPT code.
      5
      47
      MIT
    • Fonteum — Healthcare Provider Data by Fonteum

      Fonteum — Healthcare Providerofficial

      Fonteum
      F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Source-provenanced US federal healthcare provider data over MCP. Resolve any NPI or CCN across NPPES, OIG LEIE, SAM.gov, state Medicaid exclusions, CMS PECOS, Care Compare, and Open Payments — every field carries a 14-field provenance contract, and an "excluded or compromised anywhere" check runs on every lookup.
      -
    Deploy Server
    RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

    TDQS

    A4/5.0

    Scored across 4 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Each tool has a distinct primary purpose, and the names/descriptions are mostly clear. However, read_document_bytes and preview_pdf_pages both operate on cited policy documents for app rendering, and their raw-bytes vs. rasterized-preview distinction could cause minor selection confusion.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern: review_claim_requirements, read_document_bytes, preview_pdf_pages, and list_policy_library. No casing or style inconsistencies exist, and each name clearly suggests its action.

    Tool Count5/5

    Four tools is well-scoped for a focused claims document and requirements server. Each tool covers a distinct step in the workflow: resolving requirements, reading document bytes, previewing PDFs, and listing the policy library.

    Completeness4/5

    The core workflow is covered end-to-end: review claim requirements, access document content, preview PDFs, and browse the policy library. Minor gaps remain, such as no general search/filter over the library and no non-app-facing document retrieval path.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources