Skip to main content
Glama
jamesrosing

tebra-mcp-server

by jamesrosing
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Update Patient External ID

tebra_update_patient_external_id
Idempotent

Assign or update an external ID to a Tebra patient to link them with an external system. Requires a registered external vendor ID for the mapping.

Instructions

Set or update a patient external ID in Tebra, linking the patient to an external system. Register the vendor first with tebra_register_external_vendor and pass its numeric ID as externalVendorId.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
patientIdYesTebra patient ID
externalIdYesExternal system ID to assign
practiceIdNoOptional practice ID
externalVendorIdNoExternal vendor ID from tebra_get_external_vendors (recommended)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.6.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / externalVendorId
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "External vendor ID from tebra_get_external_vendors (recommended)",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / practiceId
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional practice ID",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / vendorName
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Optional external vendor name",
-  "type": "string"
-}
  2. First observedv0.2.5

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, which align with the 'Set or update' action. The description adds behavioral context about the prerequisite of vendor registration, which is beyond what annotations provide. However, it doesn't disclose potential side effects (e.g., overwriting an existing ID) or error conditions, but with annotations covering the safety profile, a 3 is appropriate.

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 fluff. The primary action and purpose are front-loaded, followed immediately by the critical prerequisite. Every word 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 tool with 4 parameters (2 required) and no output schema, the description covers the core function, the prerequisite, and the source of a key parameter. It doesn't discuss error handling or what happens if the vendor is not registered, but those are less critical given the clarity provided. The description is sufficient for an agent to call the tool correctly in the intended flow.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by specifying that externalVendorId is a 'numeric ID' and connecting it to the registration step, which clarifies the expected format and source beyond the schema's generic description. This extra guidance merits a 4.

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 states the action ('Set or update'), the resource ('patient external ID'), and the purpose ('linking the patient to an external system'). It also distinguishes this tool from other update tools by focusing on external IDs. The verb+resource combination is specific and unambiguous.

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 provides a clear prerequisite: 'Register the vendor first with tebra_register_external_vendor and pass its numeric ID as externalVendorId.' This gives explicit context on how to prepare for using the tool. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it, but the prerequisite and focus on external IDs effectively differentiate it from sibling update tools.

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