Databricks Field Guide by TechFabric

Find code examples

get_code_examples

Read-onlyIdempotent

The SQL, Python, CLI and config blocks in the guide that match a topic, each with the explanation around it, the section it is from (URL with anchor), and the docs links that section cites. Runnable context for a coding agent; check the linked Databricks docs for current syntax.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`lang`	No	Only this language: sql, python, bash, yaml, json, hcl ...
`limit`	No	How many examples (default 8)
`topic`	Yes	What the code should do or touch, e.g. 'lakebase branch', 'auto loader', 'row filter'
`chapter`	No	Only examples from this chapter or note: its slug (lakebase, unity-catalog), path or URL. list_chapters has them; the field-guide-code prompt completes them.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`lang`	Yes
`build`	Yes	The commit of the deploy that answered
`topic`	Yes
`total`	Yes
`ttlMs`	Yes	How long this answer may be kept before asking again, in milliseconds
`examples`	Yes
`index_built`	Yes	When this deploy's index was built (ISO 8601)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 21, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / chapter

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Only examples from this chapter or note: its slug (lakebase, unity-catalog), path or URL. list_chapters has them; the field-guide-code prompt completes them.",
+  "maxLength": 500,
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedOct 19, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one genuine piece of context beyond structured fields: that returned syntax may be stale and the cited doc links should be checked, plus a note that results carry the surrounding explanation and source anchor.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the returned artifact and its composition; the caveat sentence is short and earns its place. Slightly dense in the first sentence but no filler.

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 and annotations carry the return shape and safety profile, and the description supplies purpose plus the staleness caveat. The main remaining gap is sibling differentiation, which matters given nearby search_guide and get_chapter.

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 baseline is 3; however the description adds meaning beyond the schema by noting results are scoped to 'a topic' and include the section URL and cited docs links, clarifying that filtering is topical and provenance is returned. It still says nothing about lang, limit, or chapter usage.

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 concrete resource (code blocks: SQL, Python, CLI, config) filtered by topic, plus what accompanies each block. It doesn't name a sibling to differentiate from, so the agent must infer how it differs from search_guide or get_chapter.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

'Runnable context for a coding agent' implies the use case (wanting usable code rather than prose) but gives no explicit when-to-use/when-not rules and never points to search_guide or get_chapter as alternatives.

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

All Databricks Field Guide by TechFabric tools Inspect

Try in Browser

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

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.