Neo4j MCP Server

neo4j_query

Execute raw Cypher queries on Neo4j with optional parameters and write mode.

Instructions

Execute a raw Cypher query against Neo4j.

WARNING: This tool allows arbitrary Cypher execution. Use with caution. Prefer the structured tools (neo4j_search, neo4j_insert, etc.) when possible.

Args: query: Cypher query string. parameters: Optional query parameters. write: Set True for write queries (CREATE, MERGE, DELETE, SET, etc.).

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": "neo4j_query"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`query`	Yes
`write`	No
`parameters`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

While no annotations are provided, the description warns of arbitrary execution and explains the 'write' parameter for write queries. It does not disclose rate limits or auth needs, but for a direct query tool, the caution is sufficient.

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 concise: a one-line summary, a warning, preference guidance, then argument details. It is well-structured and front-loaded with critical information.

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 presence of an output schema, the description covers purpose, when to use/avoid, parameter details, and safety warnings. It provides all necessary context for an AI agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 0%, but the description explains each parameter in the Args section: query as Cypher string, parameters as optional, write as boolean for write operations. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's minimal type info.

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 explicitly states 'Execute a raw Cypher query against Neo4j.' This clearly defines the tool's function and distinguishes it from structured sibling tools like neo4j_search and neo4j_insert.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description includes a warning about arbitrary Cypher execution and explicitly advises 'Prefer the structured tools when possible.' This provides clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance, naming specific alternatives.

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

Deploy Server