tebra-mcp-server

Get Appointments

tebra_get_appointments

Read-only

Retrieve Tebra appointments for a date range and filter by provider, patient, confirmation status, service location, or reason to get only the records you need.

Instructions

Get appointments from Tebra within a date range. Filter by resource (provider name), patient, confirmation status, service location, reason, type, and more. To filter by provider, use resourceName with the provider full name (the WSDL has no provider ID filter).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`fields`	No	Optional list of result fields to return (dotted paths for nested values, e.g. "cases.policies.companyName"). Omit for the default field set. Request only the fields you need — results contain protected health information.
`endDate`	Yes	End date (ISO 8601, e.g. 2026-03-31)
`patientId`	No	Filter by Tebra patient ID
`startDate`	Yes	Start date (ISO 8601, e.g. 2026-03-25)
`practiceName`	No	Filter by practice name
`resourceName`	No	Scheduler resource name to filter by — for provider filtering, pass the provider full name
`toCreatedDate`	No	Created date range end (YYYY-MM-DD)
`appointmentType`	No	Filter by type: U=Unknown, P=Patient, O=Other
`fromCreatedDate`	No	Created date range start (YYYY-MM-DD)
`patientFullName`	No	Filter by patient full name
`appointmentReason`	No	Filter by appointment reason
`casePayerScenario`	No	Patient case payer scenario filter
`confirmationStatus`	No	Filter by confirmation status
`toLastModifiedDate`	No	Modified date range end (YYYY-MM-DD)
`serviceLocationName`	No	Filter by service location name
`fromLastModifiedDate`	No	Modified date range start (YYYY-MM-DD)
`timeZoneOffsetFromGMT`	No	Time zone offset from GMT for returned times (e.g. -8)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed6 schema fields changedv0.6.0Sep 21, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / confirmationStatus / enum

Previous value: -[
-  "Confirmed",
-  "CheckedIn",
-  "NoShow",
-  "CheckedOut",
-  "Rescheduled",
-  "Scheduled",
-  "Cancelled"
-]New value: +[
+  "Scheduled",
+  "ReminderSent",
+  "Confirmed",
+  "CheckedIn",
+  "Roomed",
+  "ReadyToBeSeen",
+  "CheckedOut",
+  "NeedsReschedule",
+  "NoShow",
+  "Cancelled",
+  "Rescheduled",
+  "Tentative"
+]

addedInput schema / properties / fields

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional list of result fields to return (dotted paths for nested values, e.g. \"cases.policies.companyName\"). Omit for the default field set. Request only the fields you need — results contain protected health information.",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / practiceName

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Filter by practice name",
+  "type": "string"
+}

removedInput schema / properties / providerId

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Tebra provider ID to filter by",
-  "type": "string"
-}

addedInput schema / properties / resourceName

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Scheduler resource name to filter by — for provider filtering, pass the provider full name",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / timeZoneOffsetFromGMT

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Time zone offset from GMT for returned times (e.g. -8)",
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedv0.2.5Jun 14, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations already establish that this is a safe read operation. The description adds one useful behavioral nuance—the provider filtering workaround—but does not disclose other behavior such as result format, paging, or limits. This is acceptable 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 no wasted words. The primary purpose and date-range scope come first, followed by the filter capabilities and the most important parameter nuance. Every sentence earns its place.

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 read-only list tool with a fully self-documenting schema, the description is sufficient for correct invocation: it names the scope, the available filters, and the provider-filtering caveat. The lack of an output schema and any mention of response shape is a minor gap, but not critical given the strong schema and annotation coverage.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all 17 parameters. The description summarizes filter categories and restates the resourceName/provider guidance already present in the schema, but adds little new parameter-level meaning beyond that.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb and resource: getting appointments from Tebra within a date range, with filtering options. It is easy to distinguish from a detail-fetch tool, though it does not explicitly name sibling tools like tebra_get_appointment_detail, so it stops short of full sibling differentiation.

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?

The description gives clear usage context: use this to retrieve date-filtered appointment lists with multiple filter dimensions. It also provides a useful provider-filtering rule (use resourceName with provider full name because the WSDL has no provider ID filter). It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the context is clear.

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

Deploy Server

Get Appointments

Instructions

Input Schema

Schema Changelog

TDQS

Other Tools