MCP Firebird

list-tables

list-tables

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve all user tables in the current Firebird database to explore schema and identify available data sources.

Instructions

Lists all user tables in the current Firebird database.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`error`	No	Failure information; present when success is false
`result`	No	The legacy JSON payload; present for completed operations and partial batches
`success`	Yes	False for tool failures, including partially failed batches

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv2.12.0Oct 7, 2026

changedInput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$defs": {
+    "__schema0": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "number"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "boolean"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        },
+        {
+          "items": {
+            "$ref": "#/$defs/__schema0"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        {
+          "additionalProperties": {
+            "$ref": "#/$defs/__schema0"
+          },
+          "propertyNames": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": "object"
+        }
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "error": {
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "description": "Failure information; present when success is false",
+      "properties": {
+        "details": {
+          "additionalProperties": {
+            "$ref": "#/$defs/__schema0"
+          },
+          "propertyNames": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": "object"
+        },
+        "message": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "type": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "message",
+        "type"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "result": {
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "description": "The legacy JSON payload; present for completed operations and partial batches",
+      "properties": {
+        "tables": {
+          "items": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "tables"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "success": {
+      "description": "False for tool failures, including partially failed batches",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "success"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.0Jan 2, 2026
- removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
First observedAug 18, 2025

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

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, covering the safety profile. The description adds that only user tables are listed and that the scope is the current database, which is useful context beyond annotations, but it does not mention ordering, pagination, or other behavioral traits.

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 with no wasted words. It states the action, resource, and scope immediately.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool has no parameters, rich annotations already covering safety and idempotency, and an output schema that handles return values, the description is complete for its complexity. It specifies the database scope and table type, which are the key details an agent needs.

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 is 4. The description cannot add parameter meaning beyond the empty schema, and the schema fully covers the (nonexistent) parameters.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Lists all user tables' and scopes it to 'the current Firebird database.' It clearly identifies the resource as user tables, distinguishing it from system tables, but does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like describe-table or get-table-data.

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 offers no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no alternatives. It simply states what the tool does, leaving the agent to infer that it is used when a list of tables is needed.

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