guarded-sql-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

List sites

list_sites

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve all sites with their code, city, and non-retired device counts. Use it to inventory locations and check active device totals.

Instructions

List all sites with their code, city and number of non-retired devices.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`rows`	Yes
`hasMore`	Yes	More rows matched than were returned.
`rowCount`	Yes	Rows in this response.
`truncated`	Yes	Long values were cut or rows dropped to fit the response size limit.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.3.0Oct 1, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "hasMore": {
+      "description": "More rows matched than were returned.",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "rowCount": {
+      "description": "Rows in this response.",
+      "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+      "minimum": 0,
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "rows": {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": false,
+        "properties": {
+          "active_devices": {
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "number",
+              "boolean",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "city": {
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "number",
+              "boolean",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "code": {
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "number",
+              "boolean",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "name": {
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "number",
+              "boolean",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "truncated": {
+      "description": "Long values were cut or rows dropped to fit the response size limit.",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "rowCount",
+    "hasMore",
+    "truncated",
+    "rows"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv0.1.0Sep 28, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description's only added behavior detail is the 'non-retired devices' scoping nuance, which is useful but modest; with an output schema present, describing return fields adds little.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that names the action, the resource, and the returned fields with zero filler. Nothing is repeated from the schema or annotations.

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?

This is a zero-parameter, read-only listing tool with annotations covering safety and an output schema covering the return shape, so the description does not need to explain results. It is complete for the call, though it says nothing about volume, ordering, or whether the list is paginated.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly avoids inventing parameter semantics for a parameterless call.

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 ('List') and resource ('sites') and even enumerates the shape of each result (code, city, count of non-retired devices). No sibling among search_devices, get_device, find_people, device_software, stale_devices, or open_tickets overlaps with site listing, so there is nothing to differentiate against; the definition is clear as written.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no statement of when to reach for this tool versus any other, nor any prerequisite or exclusion. The phrase 'all sites' implicitly signals there is no filtering or pagination option, but that is inference rather than guidance. No alternative site-lookup tool exists among the siblings, which softens but does not remove the gap.

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

Deploy Server