Skip to main content
Glama
blitzstermayank

Teradata MCP Server

base_databaseList

Retrieve a complete list of all databases available in the Teradata system to identify accessible data sources and manage database inventory.

Instructions

Lists all databases in the Teradata System.

Returns: ResponseType: formatted response with query results + metadata

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The core handler function executing the 'base_databaseList' tool logic: runs a SQL query on dbc.DatabasesV to list databases (excluding PDCRADM), formats results, and returns MCP-standard response with metadata.
    def handle_base_databaseList(conn: TeradataConnection, *args, **kwargs):
        """
        Lists all databases in the Teradata System.
    
        Returns:
          ResponseType: formatted response with query results + metadata
        """
        logger.debug(f"Tool: handle_base_databaseList: Args: None")
    
        sql = "select DataBaseName, DECODE(DBKind, 'U', 'User', 'D','DataBase') as DBType, CommentString from dbc.DatabasesV dv where OwnerName <> 'PDCRADM'"
    
        with conn.cursor() as cur:
            rows = cur.execute(sql)
            data = rows_to_json(cur.description, rows.fetchall())
            metadata = {
                "tool_name": "base_databaseList",
                "sql": sql,
                "columns": [
                    {"name": col[0], "type": col[1].__name__ if hasattr(col[1], '__name__') else str(col[1])}
                    for col in cur.description
                ] if cur.description else [],
                "row_count": len(data)
            }
            logger.debug(f"Tool: handle_base_databaseList: metadata: {metadata}")
            return create_response(data, metadata)
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions the return type ('formatted response with query results + metadata'), which adds some behavioral context beyond the basic listing action. However, it lacks details on permissions, rate limits, or any destructive implications, leaving significant gaps for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by a brief note on the return type. It is appropriately sized with no wasted words, though the return note could be slightly more integrated for optimal structure.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (0 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate. It covers the purpose and hints at the return format, but for a read operation in a system with many siblings, it lacks sufficient context on usage and behavioral traits to be considered complete.

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?

The tool has 0 parameters, and the schema description coverage is 100%, so there is no need for parameter details in the description. The baseline for this scenario is 4, as the description appropriately avoids redundant information and focuses on the tool's purpose and output.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb ('Lists') and resource ('all databases in the Teradata System'), making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'base_tableList' or 'dba_databaseSpace', which might have overlapping or related functionality, preventing a perfect score.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as 'base_tableList' for tables or 'dba_databaseSpace' for space details. It lacks explicit context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the purpose alone.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/blitzstermayank/MCP'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server