Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MCP MS SQL Server

MCP MS SQL Server

by SerenaHangSinclair
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

generate_visualization

Generate visualizations like bar, scatter, pie, line, heatmap, or table from SQL query results to help analyze data.

Instructions

Generate visualizations (bar, scatter, pie, line, heatmap, table) from SQL query results

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": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "generate_visualization"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYes
viz_typeNoauto
titleNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Only states it generates from SQL query results; no disclosure of side effects, permissions, data limits, or response characteristics.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Single sentence with front-loaded purpose. Efficient but could include more detail without being verbose.

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

Completeness3/5

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

With output schema present, return values need not be detailed. However, lacks explanation of parameter behavior and use cases, leaving gaps for a 3-parameter tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%, but description adds minimal parameter info. Mentions viz_type implicitly via listed types, but does not explain the 'auto' default, query format, or title parameter.

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?

Description clearly states the tool generates visualizations, lists supported types (bar, scatter, pie, line, heatmap, table), and specifies input from SQL query results. This distinguishes it from siblings like generate_powerbi_visualization.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Implicitly suggests use when needing visualizations from SQL queries, but no explicit guidance on when to choose this over alternatives like sql_query or generate_powerbi_visualization.

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