Skip to main content
Glama
LawrenceCirillo

QuickBase MCP Server

quickbase_test_connection

Verify connectivity to QuickBase by testing the connection through the MCP server, ensuring seamless integration and operational readiness for managing applications and data.

Instructions

Test connection to QuickBase

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • MCP server handler that processes tool calls for quickbase_test_connection by invoking QuickBaseClient.testConnection() and returning formatted success/failure message.
    case 'quickbase_test_connection':
      const isConnected = await this.qbClient.testConnection();
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: 'text',
            text: `Connection ${isConnected ? 'successful' : 'failed'}`,
          },
        ],
      };
  • Core implementation of connection test: attempts to fetch app information; returns true on success, false on failure.
    async testConnection(): Promise<boolean> {
      try {
        await this.getAppInfo();
        return true;
      } catch (error) {
        return false;
      }
    }
  • Tool definition including name, description, and empty input schema (no parameters required).
      name: 'quickbase_test_connection',
      description: 'Test connection to QuickBase',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {},
        required: []
      }
    },
  • src/index.ts:50-52 (registration)
    Registers the list tools handler which returns the quickbaseTools array containing quickbase_test_connection.
    this.server.setRequestHandler(ListToolsRequestSchema, async () => {
      return {
        tools: quickbaseTools,
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('Test connection') but does not disclose traits such as what the test entails (e.g., authentication check, network ping), expected outcomes (e.g., success/failure indicators), or any side effects (e.g., logging, rate limits). This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's 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?

The description is a single, direct sentence ('Test connection to QuickBase') with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and efficiently conveys the core purpose without any fluff or redundancy, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimal but incomplete. It fails to explain what the test involves, what results to expect, or how it integrates with sibling tools (e.g., as a prerequisite). For a connectivity tool in a suite of data operations, more context is needed to guide effective use.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter information is needed. The description does not add any parameter details, which is appropriate, and it does not contradict the schema. A baseline score of 4 is applied as it adequately handles the lack of parameters without introducing confusion.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose as testing the connection to QuickBase, using a specific verb ('Test') and resource ('connection to QuickBase'). However, it does not distinguish this from sibling tools, as all siblings involve data operations (e.g., create, delete, query) rather than connectivity testing, so differentiation is implied but not explicit.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks context on prerequisites (e.g., before performing other operations), exclusions, or comparisons to other tools, leaving usage entirely to inference based on the tool name alone.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Related Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/LawrenceCirillo/QuickBase-MCP-Server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server