AI NetCafé

Translate SQL between dialects

transpile_sql

Read-onlyIdempotent

Convert a SQL statement from one dialect to another — mysql, postgres, sqlite, tsql, oracle, snowflake, bigquery, redshift, spark, hive, presto, trino, duckdb, clickhouse, databricks, doris, starrocks and more. Deterministic parser (sqlglot), not an LLM: the same input always produces the same output, and syntax errors come back with the exact line and column. Use it when migrating queries between databases or debugging dialect-specific syntax.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`sql`	Yes	The SQL statement (or several, separated by semicolons).
`read`	No	Source dialect, e.g. "mysql". Omit to auto-detect from generic SQL.
`write`	Yes	Target dialect, e.g. "postgres", "bigquery", "doris".

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnly, idempotent, not destructive), the description adds valuable behavioral context: it is a deterministic parser (sqlglot), not an LLM, guaranteeing same input/output, and reports syntax errors with exact line and column. This transparency helps set expectations for users. It doesn't cover every edge case but provides meaningful insight.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, then crucial behavioral notes, then usage context. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or filler. It is concise and well-structured.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the presence of an output schema, a well-annotated safety profile, and a comprehensive parameter schema, the description covers the essential aspects: what it does, when to use it, and its deterministic error-reporting behavior. For a conversion tool, this is complete and leaves little room for confusion.

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 schema already provides 100% coverage with descriptions for all parameters, including examples. The tool description lists dialects and mentions determinism but adds no additional parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema provides. Baseline of 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 tool's function with a specific verb ('Convert') and resource ('SQL statement'), and lists numerous target dialects, making its scope unmistakable. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on dialect conversion, which none of the siblings do.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool ('when migrating queries between databases or debugging dialect-specific syntax'). It does not mention when not to use it or alternatives, but given the tool's unique role, this is a minor gap. The guidance is clear and actionable.

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

All AI NetCafé tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Every tool has a clearly distinct purpose with detailed descriptions that explicitly differentiate even close pairs like diff_tables vs reconcile_ledger and list_models vs model_costs. No two tools appear to do the same thing, and the what_can_you_do tool further resolves any confusion.

Naming Consistency3/5

The majority of tools follow a verb_noun snake_case pattern (build_app, fetch_page, list_tasks), but several notable deviations exist: ai_visibility, china_reachability, model_costs, json_yaml, pdf_to_markdown, what_can_you_do, recall, remember, and jwt_decode. This mixed convention, while still readable, is not fully consistent.

Tool Count3/5

With 34 tools, the count is high and exceeds the typical comfortable range for an MCP server. However, the server is a broad AI utility platform covering web, data, LLM, conversion, and scheduling tasks, and each tool appears to serve a distinct purpose with little redundancy, making the large but organized set borderline appropriate for its scope.

Completeness3/5

The tool surface covers a wide array of common workflows (search, fetch, table operations, PDF extraction, model comparisons, task scheduling, memory). However, check_job references deep_research, translate_pdf, and make_slides which are not present in the tool list, and there is no update tool for tasks/apps or a way to delete memories, leaving some user journeys incomplete.

Resources

Need Help?