QGIS MCP Server

Batch Commands

batch_commands

Execute multiple non-destructive QGIS commands in one round-trip to reduce overhead; call destructive commands individually.

Instructions

Execute multiple commands in a single round-trip. Each command is {"type": "<command_name>", "params": {...}}. Destructive commands (batch, delete_features, execute_code, execute_connection_sql, import_layer_to_connection, reload_plugin, remove_layer, rollback_edits, set_setting) are not allowed in batch, call them individually.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "commands": "<commands>"
    },
    "name": "batch_commands"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`commands`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the behavioral burden and does disclose a crucial safety trait: destructive commands are forbidden inside a batch and must be called individually. It does not mention execution order, partial-failure behavior, or atomicity, but the explicit destructive-command restriction is substantive transparency beyond the schema.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose and command format. The second sentence earns its place by providing essential safety exclusions. No filler or redundant restatement of the title appears.

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 is complete enough for safe invocation: it explains the payload shape, the purpose of batching, and the key destructive-command restriction. It does not state how errors or ordering are handled within a batch, which would strengthen an agent's understanding, but the presence of an output schema reduces the need to describe return details.

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 is minimal (an array of additionalProperties objects), but the description compensates well by defining each element's structure as {'type': '<command_name>', 'params': {...}}. It also clarifies which command types are disallowed. It does not enumerate every allowed command, but that information is inherently available through sibling tool definitions.

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 clearly states the tool's function with a specific verb and resource: 'Execute multiple commands in a single round-trip.' It also supplies the exact command format, distinguishing this wrapper tool from the many individual sibling tools.

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 gives clear exclusion guidance, listing destructive commands that are 'not allowed in batch' and instructing the agent to 'call them individually.' It implies the intended use case—combining non-destructive commands—but does not explicitly state broader when-to-use guidance versus simply calling a single command.

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

Deploy Server