Retrieve records from FileMaker databases using advanced filters, sorting, and pagination. Specify layout, query conditions, sort order, limit, and offset to get precise data.
Query records with advanced filtering and sorting
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sort | No | Sort array | |
| limit | No | Max records to return | |
| query | No | Find requests array | |
| layout | Yes | Layout name | |
| offset | No | Records to skip | |
| database | Yes | Database identifier |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds little beyond the tool name: 'Query records with advanced filtering and sorting' does not explain return behavior, pagination, read-only guarantees, or how the query array is interpreted, leaving important behavior implicit.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately short, though 'advanced' is somewhat filler and adds little concrete meaning.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The description is too thin for a tool with six parameters, no annotations, and no output schema. The most important parameter, query, is an open object with only 'Find requests array' as schema documentation, and the description does not clarify how to construct valid query objects or what the returned records look like.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
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. The description does not meaningfully refine parameter meanings; 'advanced filtering and sorting' only loosely maps to the query and sort parameters without explaining their structure.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description names a clear verb-resource pair: 'Query records' with filtering and sorting. It distinguishes itself from the CRUD, metadata, and script siblings because it is the only one focused on reading records with filter/sort behavior, though 'advanced' is vague.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies this tool is for retrieving records rather than creating, updating, deleting, or inspecting metadata. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and does not reference any alternative tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.