Skip to main content
Glama
astandrik

Local YDB MCP

by astandrik
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

local_ydb_storage_placement

Read-onlyIdempotent

Confirm the exact storage pool shape and BSC physical placement before adding or reducing storage groups using this read-only inspection.

Instructions

Read-only storage inspection that returns ReadStoragePool output and BSC physical placement. Use before adding or reducing storage groups to confirm the exact pool shape.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
profileNoNamed profile from local-ydb.config.json. Defaults to config.defaultProfile.
configPathNoAbsolute path to an explicit local-ydb config file. Missing, unreadable, oversized, or invalid explicit files fail closed instead of using defaults.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.1.21
    • changedInput schema / properties / configPath / description
      Previous value: -"Explicit local-ydb config file path to load for this tool call. Useful when the MCP server should pick up a different config without restart."New value: +"Absolute path to an explicit local-ydb config file. Missing, unreadable, oversized, or invalid explicit files fail closed instead of using defaults."
    • addedInput schema / properties / configPath / minLength
      Added value: +1
  2. Addedv0.1.13
  3. Removedv0.1.12
  4. Addedv0.1.5
  5. Removedv0.1.4
  6. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the read-only behavior is covered. The description adds value by specifying the output shape (ReadStoragePool output and BSC physical placement), but it does not discuss failure behavior, connection requirements, or how to interpret the output.

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 sentences with every part earning its place: the first defines the action/output and the second gives the operational trigger. No filler or redundancy.

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?

Given no output schema, the description reasonably names the returned artifacts and the decision context. It is sufficient for a no-required-parameter read-only inspection, although it could expand the BSC acronym or describe the result structure.

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 both optional parameters are self-explanatory in the schema (profile default and configPath fail-closed behavior). The tool description adds no parameter-level detail, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource ('read-only storage inspection') and names its exact outputs (ReadStoragePool output and BSC physical placement), which distinguishes it from broad status/inventory siblings. The tool's role is unambiguous.

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?

Gives an explicit usage context: 'Use before adding or reducing storage groups to confirm the exact pool shape.' It does not mention when not to use it or name sibling alternatives, so it misses the top tier but is still clear.

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