tebra-mcp-server

Create Appointment

tebra_create_appointment

Create a patient appointment in Tebra with required patient, provider, service location, and start time, plus end date or duration. Set optional reason, mode, status, and notes.

Instructions

Create a new patient appointment in Tebra. Requires patient, provider, service location, start time, and either endDate or duration (minutes). Optionally set reason, mode (InOffice/Telehealth), status, and notes.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`notes`	No	Optional appointment notes
`endDate`	No	Appointment end date/time (ISO 8601); alternative to duration
`duration`	No	Duration in minutes (used to compute end time when endDate is omitted)
`patientId`	Yes	Tebra patient ID
`startDate`	Yes	Appointment start date/time (ISO 8601, e.g. 2026-04-01T09:00:00)
`practiceId`	No	Practice ID (required by Tebra; auto-resolved to the account's first practice if omitted)
`providerId`	Yes	Tebra provider ID
`appointmentMode`	No	Optional appointment mode
`appointmentName`	No	Optional appointment display name
`appointmentStatus`	No	Optional initial status (default 'Scheduled')
`serviceLocationId`	Yes	Tebra service location ID
`appointmentReasonId`	No	Optional Tebra appointment reason ID
`insurancePolicyAuthorizationId`	No	Optional insurance authorization ID to link

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed10 schema fields changedv0.6.0Sep 21, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / appointmentMode

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional appointment mode",
+  "enum": [
+    "InOffice",
+    "Telehealth"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / appointmentName

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional appointment display name",
+  "type": "string"
+}

changedInput schema / properties / appointmentReasonId / description

Previous value: -"Tebra appointment reason ID"New value: +"Optional Tebra appointment reason ID"

addedInput schema / properties / appointmentStatus

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional initial status (default 'Scheduled')",
+  "enum": [
+    "Unknown",
+    "Scheduled",
+    "ReminderSent",
+    "Confirmed",
+    "CheckedIn",
+    "Roomed",
+    "CheckedOut",
+    "NeedsReschedule",
+    "ReadyToBeSeen",
+    "NoShow",
+    "Cancelled",
+    "Rescheduled",
+    "Tentative"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

removedInput schema / properties / confirmationStatus

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Optional confirmation status (e.g. Confirmed, Unconfirmed)",
-  "type": "string"
-}

changedInput schema / properties / duration / description

Previous value: -"Optional duration in minutes (defaults to appointment reason default)"New value: +"Duration in minutes (used to compute end time when endDate is omitted)"

addedInput schema / properties / endDate

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Appointment end date/time (ISO 8601); alternative to duration",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / insurancePolicyAuthorizationId

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional insurance authorization ID to link",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / practiceId

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Practice ID (required by Tebra; auto-resolved to the account's first practice if omitted)",
+  "type": "string"
+}

changedInput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "patientId",
-  "providerId",
-  "serviceLocationId",
-  "appointmentReasonId",
-  "startDate"
-]New value: +[
+  "patientId",
+  "providerId",
+  "serviceLocationId",
+  "startDate"
+]

First observedv0.2.5Jun 14, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so 'Create' is consistent and no contradiction exists. The description adds the useful 'either endDate or duration' constraint, but it does not disclose side effects, permission requirements, or what the response contains. With annotations covering basic safety, this is adequate but not rich.

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 sentences with zero filler: action first, required inputs second, optional inputs third. Every clause earns its place and the key creation constraint is front-loaded.

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 13-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential required fields, the critical endDate/duration constraint, and optional categories. It does not mention the return value, which an agent may need to know, but this is a minor gap since the schema and annotations already carry significant detail.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description goes beyond the schema by explicitly stating that either endDate or duration is required—something the schema leaves ambiguous since both are optional—and it groups the optional fields (reason, mode, status, notes), which aids selection.

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?

Description states a specific verb and resource: 'Create a new patient appointment in Tebra.' This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like update_appointment and delete_appointment by emphasizing 'new' and listing creation-specific required fields.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description clearly implies use when creating an appointment and lists the necessary inputs, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives such as update_appointment or delete_appointment, nor does it provide when-not-to-use guidance. It conveys context but leaves exclusion logic unstated.

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

Deploy Server

Create Appointment

Instructions

Input Schema

Schema Changelog

TDQS

Other Tools