Skip to main content
Glama
jamesrosing

tebra-mcp-server

by jamesrosing
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Get Encounter

tebra_get_encounter
Read-only

Retrieve encounter details by ID, including patient, providers, status, service dates, place of service, and service line IDs.

Instructions

Get encounter details from Tebra by encounter ID, including patient, providers, status, service dates, place of service, and service line IDs.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fieldsNoOptional 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.
encounterIdYesTebra encounter ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.6.0
    • 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"
+}
  2. First observedv0.2.5

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds the list of returned fields, which provides context about the response content but not about any side effects or edge-case behaviors. It does not contradict the annotations and offers modest additional value.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that states the purpose and key outputs without redundancy. Every word earns its place, making it highly efficient and easy to parse.

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 simple getter with two parameters and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It lists several key fields but not exhaustively, and does not mention error behavior (e.g., 404 on missing ID). However, the fields parameter allows custom selection, mitigating the need for a full field list. The annotations cover safety, so the definition is adequate for an agent to call it correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, with both parameters well-described: encounterId is simply a Tebra ID, and fields includes dotted-path guidance and a PHI warning. The description's mention of the default field set adds a small amount of context beyond the schema but does not significantly enhance parameter understanding.

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?

The description uses a specific verb (Get), names the resource (encounter details), and lists the key returned fields (patient, providers, status, service dates, place of service, service line IDs). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_charges or get_appointment_detail, which target different resources.

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 implies usage when you need encounter details by ID, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or conditions for not using this tool. There is no guidance on choosing between this and related tools like tebra_get_appointment_detail, so the usage context is implied rather than stated.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools