Skip to main content
Glama
jamesrosing

tebra-mcp-server

by jamesrosing
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Get Procedure Codes

tebra_get_procedure_codes
Read-only

Retrieve procedure codes from Tebra practice with optional filters for CPT code, active status, or customer-specific codes. Returns official names, descriptions, and default units.

Instructions

Get procedure codes configured in the Tebra practice. Optionally filter by CPT code, active status, or customer-specific codes. Returns codes with official names, descriptions, and default units.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
activeNoOptional filter for active codes only
searchTermNoOptional CPT/procedure code to filter by (e.g. 99213)
customerSpecificNoOptional filter for customer-specific codes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.6.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / active
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional filter for active codes only",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / customerSpecific
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional filter for customer-specific codes",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / searchTerm / description
      Previous value: -"Optional CPT code or search term to filter by"New value: +"Optional CPT/procedure code to filter by (e.g. 99213)"
  2. First observedv0.2.5

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description is consistent with that ('Get', 'Returns'). It adds useful context by scoping to codes 'configured in the Tebra practice' and by naming the returned fields, which is valuable given there is no output schema.

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 two tight sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose, then covers filtering and return contents efficiently.

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 lookup tool with three optional filters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, scope, filters, and return fields. It does not mention pagination or limits, but the annotations already cover the read-only and open-world safety profile.

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?

The input schema already documents all three optional parameters with 100% coverage. The description paraphrases those same filters (CPT code, active status, customer-specific) but adds no deeper semantics such as matching behavior, defaults, or interaction between filters.

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 clearly identifies a specific resource ('procedure codes configured in the Tebra practice') and a specific action ('Get'), and adds meaningful detail about filters and returned fields. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like charges, appointments, or payments.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives, and no exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned. Sibling tools like tebra_get_charges and tebra_get_transactions exist, but the description does not explain how procedure codes fit into that selection space.

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