Skip to main content
Glama
akrym1582

sqldb-mcp-server

by akrym1582
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

saveQueryEvidence

Run a read-only SQL query and save the statement with its results as a Markdown report. Returns file path, row count, and preview.

Instructions

Execute a read-only SELECT SQL query and save the SQL plus the results as a Markdown report file. Returns the saved file path, the total number of rows fetched, and the first 10 rows as preview data.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sqlYesSELECT SQL statement to execute and document
databaseNoDatabase to query; omit to use the default
filepathYesDestination Markdown file path (absolute, or relative to the server working directory)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.3.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / database
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Database to query; omit to use the default",
+  "minLength": 1,
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose the read-only/SELECT-only restriction, the file-writing side effect, and the three return values — good coverage. However, it is silent on file-overwrite behavior: whether an existing destination file is clobbered, appended to, or causes an error. That is a material omission for a tool whose side effect is writing a file.

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 tight sentences that front-load the core action (execute + save as Markdown) and then state the return values. There is zero redundancy or filler; every clause earns its place.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description covers what would otherwise be missing: safety profile (read-only), return shape (file path, row count, 10-row preview), and input constraint (SELECT only). The only notable omission is overwrite/idempotency behavior for the destination file, which prevents a perfect score.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3 even with no parameter detail in the description. The description adds only mild context (read-only constrains the sql parameter; the file path is the Markdown destination), but the schema already documents sql, database, and filepath semantics adequately.

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 names a specific action chain — execute a read-only SELECT query and save the SQL plus results as a Markdown report file — and its return values. This clearly separates it from siblings like query (no file output), exportQuery (different export format/flow), and explainQuery (query-plan analysis, no persistence).

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?

The use case (producing documented evidence for later reference) is implied by the purpose, but no alternatives are named and no when-to-use vs. when-not-to-use guidance is given. With siblings query and exportQuery overlapping heavily in the query-execution space, explicit routing would materially help an agent pick correctly, and none is offered.

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