Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
supabase-schema-mcp

supabase-schema-mcp

by HarryB05
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

triggers_list

List triggers in a PostgreSQL database, filtering by table and schema. Use schema_name='all' to retrieve triggers across all schemas.

Instructions

List triggers (table, trigger, timing, event). schema_name='all' for all.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "triggers_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
table_nameNo
schema_nameNopublic

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. The verb 'List' implies a read-only operation, and the special schema_name='all' behavior is disclosed. However, it does not explain table_name behavior, output structure beyond column names, or any permissions or side effects.

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 a single sentence with two clauses, front-loading the core purpose and adding a key usage hint. Every word contributes information, with no redundancy or filler.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple listing tool, the description adequately conveys the purpose and one important behavior, but leaves a significant gap around table_name semantics and filtering logic. Since an output schema exists, return values need not be described, but parameter behavior is only partially covered.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning only for schema_name via the 'all' special value, but leaves table_name entirely unexplained and does not clarify how the parameters interact. This is insufficient for a two-parameter tool.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('List triggers') and enumerates the output columns (table, trigger, timing, event), making the tool's purpose clear. It is also distinct from sibling tools, which target other schema objects (tables, views, functions, etc.) rather than triggers.

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?

The description implies usage for listing triggers but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or exclusions. It provides a useful hint about schema_name='all' for all schemas, but this is more of a parameter tip than usage guidance.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools