Skip to main content
Glama
krlz-dev

fhir-mcp-server

by krlz-dev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Related Servers

Alternatives to fhir-mcp-server

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • FHIR MCP Server

      baala-saravanan
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables AI applications to query and retrieve healthcare data (patients, conditions, observations, medications) from a public FHIR R4 server via MCP tools.
      MIT

    • FHIR MCP Server

      maheshbalan
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      MCP server for FHIR interoperability, enabling natural language querying and manipulation of clinical data with full CRUD operations, semantic search, and RAG capabilities.
      13
      MIT

    • clinical-mcp

      sarathi-aiml
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables clinical workflows including search and summarization of synthetic FHIR patient records, PubMed literature search, and HIPAA Safe Harbor de-identification of text, via any MCP client.
      MIT

    • fhir-mcp-server

      ysnr-dev
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Connects to FHIR R4 servers and enables natural language search, read, and optional write of FHIR data from MCP clients like Claude Desktop/Code.
      6
      5 npm
      MIT
    Deploy Server
    One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

    TDQS

    A3.6/5.0

    Scored across 2 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: one searches for patients by last name, the other retrieves clinical observations for a specific patient ID. There is no meaningful overlap or ambiguity between them.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Both tool names follow the same verb_noun snake_case pattern: search_patients and get_observations. The naming is consistent, predictable, and easy for an agent to navigate.

    Tool Count3/5

    With only two tools, the server feels thin for a FHIR implementation, which typically supports a much broader range of resources and operations. However, the count is not egregiously low and could be acceptable for a narrowly scoped use case.

    Completeness2/5

    The server covers only patient search and observation retrieval, missing foundational FHIR operations like getting a patient by ID, creating or updating resources, and searching observations by clinical criteria. Agents would likely encounter dead ends when trying to perform common FHIR workflows.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources