Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
db-access-mcp

db-access-mcp

by Rheopyrin
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

query_plan

Retrieve the execution plan for a SQL query without executing it. Supports PostgreSQL, MySQL, and Redshift, returning JSON or text plans for query optimization.

Instructions

Get the execution plan (EXPLAIN) for a SQL query without running it. postgres/mysql return a JSON plan; redshift returns a text plan (Redshift supports neither FORMAT JSON nor EXPLAIN ANALYZE, and its cost numbers are relative — do not compare them to postgres costs).

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": {
      "connection": "<connection>",
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "query_plan"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYesSQL text to explain (the query itself is not executed)
databaseNoDatabase to explain against; required when the connection declares multiple databases
connectionYesConnection key from connection_list

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses non-execution, return format differences per dialect, and the redshift relative cost caveat. Lacks details on authorization or error responses.

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?

Two concise sentences. First sentence states core purpose, second sentence delivers essential usage guidelines. No wasted words.

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?

Covers purpose, non-execution, dialect differences, and redshift caveat. Missing details on error handling or output format details, but no output schema exists. Adequate for a tool with clear input schema.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, baseline 3. The description adds value by reinforcing the query parameter is not executed and explaining dialect-specific behavior that is not in the schema.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'Get', resource 'execution plan', and distinguishes from running the query. The description explicitly says 'without running it', differentiating from the sibling tool 'query'.

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?

Provides specific guidance for different database dialects (postgres/mysql vs redshift) and warns about redshift cost numbers. Does not explicitly list when not to use, but the context is clear enough for most agents.

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