evipedia-mcp
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": true
} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| search_reviewsA | Search evipedia.ai evidence reviews by name, synonym, keyword, or category. A discovery tool: returns the matching reviews (goal-qualified topic + URL) ranked by relevance so you can tell whether a review exists. To read one, pass its slug to get_conclusion (quick bottom line) or get_review (full Markdown). |
| list_reviewsA | List every evidence review in the evipedia.ai catalogue. Returns a JSON array of {topic, slug}, where topic is the review's canonical topic and slug is its identifier. Pass a slug directly to get_review or get_conclusion; the full review URL is https://evipedia.ai/{slug} (raw Markdown at https://evipedia.ai/{slug}.md). A bare topic (just the intervention name, e.g. 'Rapamycin') implies the default Health & Longevity goal; a topic with an explicit goal (e.g. 'Botox for Skin Rejuvenation') is a review targeting that specific goal. Use to enumerate or browse the full catalogue; use search_reviews to find specific reviews. |
| list_updatesA | List recently published or revised evipedia.ai reviews, newest first — the catalogue's change feed. Returns a JSON array of {title, slug, status, date}, where status is 'new' (first publication) or 'updated' (an existing review revised) and date is YYYY-MM-DD. Called with no arguments it returns the last 7 days, capped at the 100 most recent entries; pass |
| get_conclusionA | Get just the plain-text conclusion of an evidence review — the evidence-based bottom line, without the methodology, findings, or references. Prefer this for 'does X work?' questions; use get_review only when the user needs the full evidence, or get_metadata for dates and citations. Takes a slug from search_reviews, list_reviews, or list_updates; a full https://evipedia.ai/{slug} URL is also accepted and normalised to the slug. Read-only, no authentication required; an unknown slug raises "Review not found: {slug}". |
| get_reviewA | Get the full evidence review as raw Markdown — methodology, findings, safety, dosing, and references. Reviews are long (often 10k+ tokens); use get_conclusion when the bottom line is enough, or get_metadata for machine-readable dates and citations. Takes a slug from search_reviews, list_reviews, or list_updates; a full https://evipedia.ai/{slug} URL is also accepted and normalised to the slug. Read-only, no authentication required; an unknown slug raises "Review not found: {slug}". |
| get_metadataA | Get a review's structured medical metadata as JSON: review dates (datePublished/dateModified/lastReviewed — a freshness signal absent from the Markdown), the intervention as a typed |
| suggest_reviewA | Suggest a new review for evipedia.ai — propose an intervention the catalogue doesn't cover yet. Submits to evipedia's public suggestion form (the same one at evipedia.ai/suggest). Use only when the user explicitly wants to propose a new review — this sends a message to the evipedia team. Search first with search_reviews to confirm the catalogue doesn't already cover it. Only |
| get_versionA | Get the running evipedia MCP server's package name and version. Useful to confirm which build is loaded. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 8 tools
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: catalog listing, discovery search, change feed, conclusion retrieval, full review, suggestion submission, and metadata. The descriptions explicitly differentiate similar tools (e.g., get_conclusion vs get_review vs get_metadata), making misselection unlikely.
All tools follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern (get_version, list_reviews, search_reviews, etc.), with clear and predictable names matching their actions.
8 tools is well-scoped for an evidence review server, covering retrieval, discovery, metadata, and suggestion submission without redundancy or bloat.
The surface covers the full lifecycle: browsing, searching, reading conclusions, full reviews, metadata, recent updates, version check, and even proposing new reviews. No obvious gaps for the stated domain.