Layero

This connector has been deprecated

Duplicate listing of the same server under an old namespace. The maintained listing is Layero (ru.layero/layero): same endpoint https://mcp.layero.ru/mcp, current description and tools. The landing-page generator described here was removed in MCP 2.0.

Data API базы: состояние

data_api_status

Read-only

Whether the database has the Data API enabled, its address, keys and the sites allowed to call it.

Keys are shown as prefixes only: the platform never returns values and
does not store secret ones. The API cannot be enabled with a tool:
enabling gives the database a public address, and that is the person's
decision in the dashboard.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`database`	No	The database: name, slug or id. Without it — the organization's only database with the Data API enabled.
`organization`	No	Organization slug. Without it — the only one, or the personal one.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	No
`keys`	No
`sites`	No
`enabled`	Yes
`database`	Yes
`next_action`	Yes
`organization`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 18, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / database / description

Previous value: -"База: имя, слаг или id. Без него — единственная база организации с включённым Data API."New value: +"The database: name, slug or id. Without it — the organization's only database with the Data API enabled."

changedInput schema / properties / organization / description

Previous value: -"Организация (слаг). Без него — единственная или личная."New value: +"Organization slug. Without it — the only one, or the personal one."

AddedSep 14, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces this by stating the API cannot be enabled. It adds valuable specifics: keys are shown only as prefixes, secrets are never returned or stored, and enabling is a manual dashboard decision. This goes well beyond the annotation and fully discloses behavior.

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?

Three concise sentences, each carrying meaningful information. The first states the primary purpose, the second discloses key security behavior, and the third explains a critical constraint. No redundancy or 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?

The description covers what the tool returns and its constraints. An output schema exists, so return format details are not needed. The only minor gap is not explicitly stating how defaults work for omitted parameters, but the schema descriptions cover that. Overall, sufficient for correct invocation.

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 input schema descriptions already cover both parameters (database and organization) with defaults and explanations. The description does not add parameter-specific details, but the schema is sufficient. Since schema description coverage is 100%, a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 explicitly states what the tool returns: enabled status, address, keys (as prefixes), and allowed sites. This clearly differentiates it from sibling Data API tools like data_api_keys, data_api_origins, and data_api_methods, which focus on individual aspects. The verb is implicit but the resource and scope are specific.

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 conveys a key usage constraint: the API cannot be enabled via this tool, which sets expectations for read-only behavior. It implies the tool is for checking status, not for modifying. It doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives like data_api_probe, but the purpose is clear enough from the context.

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

All Layero 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.

Resources

Need Help?