SQL Server MCP by InsightfulPipe

mssql Setup Helper

query_contexts

Read-only

Helper for planning InsightfulPipe mssql requests.

Step 1: request='accounts' – Retrieve workspace_id, brand_id, connection_slug, other source metadata, AND available_actions (all read-only actions you can call).

Step 2: request='actions_details' with actions=['xxxxxx', 'xxxxxx', 'xxxxxx'] – REQUIRED before querying. Replace with actions from available_actions to get the exact request body, required identifiers, fields, and notes for each action.

Optional: request='available_actions' – Standalone call to list all available actions (already included in accounts response).

Optional: request='brands' with brand_id + workspace_id to pull brand guidelines.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "request": "<request>"
    },
    "name": "query_contexts"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`actions`	No
`request`	Yes
`brand_id`	No
`platform`	No
`workspace_id`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 28, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description is consistent with a pure metadata read. It adds real behavioral context beyond the annotations: that 'accounts' bundles available_actions, that 'actions_details' must precede querying, and that a batch of action IDs can be passed at once. It does not describe failure behavior for an unknown action ID, keeping it off a 5.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Numbered steps with front-loaded ordering make it scannable and every step maps to a real request mode. There is minor redundancy in restating that available_actions is already included in the accounts response, and the angle-bracket/parenthetical annotations add a little clutter.

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?

With a 5-parameter tool, an output schema present, and only readOnlyHint for annotations, the description covers the workflow an agent actually needs: setup, required pre-fetch, then hand-off to execute_action. Gaps are the undocumented 'platform' parameter and no statement of what happens when a required identifier is missing.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the load. It does document the meaning of three of the four request enum values and the shape of 'actions' plus the brand_id/workspace_id pairing for 'brands', but 'platform' is never mentioned and there are no format or cardinality limits on 'actions'.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names a concrete resource (InsightfulPipe mssql request metadata) and enumerates the exact request modes, so an agent can distinguish it from execute_action and query_data. 'Helper for planning' is slightly vague as a verb, but the step breakdown makes the actual function unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives an explicit ordered workflow: call 'accounts' first, then 'actions_details' with the returned action IDs, which is marked REQUIRED before querying. It also labels the other two modes 'Optional' and says why available_actions is redundant, which is exactly the when/when-not guidance needed.

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

All SQL Server MCP by InsightfulPipe tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.