Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
AIMFP

AIMFP

by aryanduntley
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

query_project

Read-onlyIdempotent

Execute custom SQL WHERE clauses on project database tables to filter and retrieve specific records for functional programming project management.

Instructions

Execute complex SQL WHERE clause (advanced, rare use)

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": {
      "table": "<table>",
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "query_project"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tableYesTable name
queryYesWHERE clause without "WHERE" keyword

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.37.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds that it executes a complex SQL WHERE clause, hinting at raw SQL-like behavior, but does not disclose specifics like potential performance implications or permission requirements beyond annotations.

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 a single, clear sentence that is front-loaded with key information ('Execute complex SQL WHERE clause') and immediately qualifies its usage ('advanced, rare use'). No unnecessary words.

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 100% parameter coverage and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks explanation of what the tool returns (likely query results) and does not contrast with similar query tools among siblings, leaving the agent to infer usage scenarios.

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% and already explains the 'query' parameter as a 'WHERE clause without "WHERE" keyword'. The description adds no new semantic information beyond confirming the tool's purpose.

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 clearly states the tool executes a 'complex SQL WHERE clause' on the project database, specifying it is 'advanced, rare use'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_from_project or query_core which are simpler queries.

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 description implies this tool is for advanced, rare cases via 'advanced, rare use', but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or when not to use it. More guidance on preferring simpler query tools would improve clarity.

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