Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

MySQL MCP by InsightfulPipe

by com.insightfulpipe
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

mysql Data Execute Action

execute_action
Destructive

Execute mysql action (Step 3 (FINAL) of workflow).

REQUIRED: Complete these steps first using query_contexts:

  1. request='accounts' - Get workspace_id, brand_id, connection_slug AND available_actions

  2. request='actions_details' with actions=['xxxxxx', 'xxxxxx', 'xxxxxx'] - Get detailed body structure for specific action(s) using actions from available_actions

IMPORTANT: Always call step 2 to see the exact body structure before executing.

execute_action runs write SQL (INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE/DDL). Writes succeed only if your workspace role allows writes and the connected database role has the needed privileges.

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": {
      "body": "<body>"
    },
    "name": "execute_action"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so safety profile is covered. The description adds non-obvious authorization context: writes succeed only if the workspace role allows writes and the connected DB role has the required privileges. It does not discuss transactionality or irreversibility, keeping it at 4 rather than 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?

Front-loads the workflow step number and the REQUIRED prerequisites before the behavioral note, so the critical routing information comes first. The literal 'xxxxxx' placeholders are sloppy but the overall length is proportionate to the setup burden.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the description covers prerequisites, authorization conditions, and write semantics. The remaining gap is the opaque free-form body parameter, which is only addressed by pointing to another tool rather than describing the payload.

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?

There is one free-form 'body' object with 0% schema coverage, so the description must compensate. It does so indirectly by directing the agent to fetch the exact body structure via query_contexts request='actions_details', which is genuinely useful, but it never describes the shape or contents of body itself and leaves placeholder 'xxxxxx' values unclarified.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Execute mysql action') and immediately disambiguates scope by saying it runs write SQL (INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE/DDL), which distinguishes it from the read-oriented sibling query_data. 'Action' alone is vague, but the workflow framing and SQL-write clarification rescue it.

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?

Explicitly mandates two prerequisite calls to query_contexts ('accounts', then 'actions_details') and warns 'Always call step 2 to see the exact body structure before executing.' The ordering and the alternative tool to use for context gathering are spelled out, leaving nothing to inference.

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

All MySQL MCP by InsightfulPipe toolsInspect
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.

Resources