Skip to main content
Glama
astandrik

Local YDB MCP

by astandrik
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

local_ydb_write_dynamic_auth_config

Write the dynamic-node auth token file to enable YDB mandatory-auth startup after choosing a SID. Set confirm=true to apply the write, or omit it to preview the planned change.

Instructions

Write the text-proto dynamic-node auth token file needed for mandatory-auth startup. Use after choosing the SID for auth hardening; without confirm=true this returns the planned file write only.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sidNoSID to store in both StaffApiUserToken and NodeRegistrationToken.
confirmNoMust be true to write the dynamic-node auth token file. Omit or false for plan-only output.
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.
tokenHostPathNoHost path for the generated text-proto auth token file. Defaults to profile.dynamicNodeAuthTokenFile when present.

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. Addedv0.1.12
  3. Removedv0.1.12
  4. Addedv0.1.5
  5. Removedv0.1.4
  6. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.1.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / configPath / description
      Added 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."
    • changedInput schema / properties / confirm / description
      Previous value: -"Must be true to execute commands. Omit or false for plan-only output."New value: +"Must be true to write the dynamic-node auth token file. Omit or false for plan-only output."
    • addedInput schema / properties / profile / description
      Added value: +"Named profile from local-ydb.config.json. Defaults to config.defaultProfile."
  7. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations indicate mutations are possible (readOnlyHint=false) but the description adds meaningful behavior: the file write is gated by confirm=true, and without it only a planned write is returned. It also explains why the file matters (mandatory-auth startup), which is beyond the schema.

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, no filler. The core action is front-loaded, followed by the most important usage constraint and the confirm behavior. Every clause adds value.

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, the description still communicates the essential workflow: plan-only by default, actual write when confirm=true. Combined with 100% parameter documentation and annotations, this is sufficient context for an agent to call the tool correctly. It could be slightly richer about what the planned output contains, but this is not a critical gap.

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 each parameter is already documented. The description does not add parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides, which matches the baseline of 3.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Write the text-proto dynamic-node auth token file needed for mandatory-auth startup.' It clearly identifies what the tool does and distinguishes it from sibling auth-related tools by naming the exact file and purpose.

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?

The description gives clear usage context: 'Use after choosing the SID for auth hardening.' It also explains the plan-only vs. actual write behavior depending on confirm. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance, so it misses the top score.

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