mysqldb-mcp-server
mysqldb-mcp-server MCP 서버
MySQL 데이터베이스 MCP 서버 프로젝트.
설치
uv 사용하여 패키지를 설치할 수 있습니다:
지엑스피1
또는 pip 사용하면:
pip install mysqldb-mcp-serverRelated MCP server: MySQL Custom MCP Server
구성 요소
도구
서버는 두 가지 도구를 제공합니다.
connect_database: 특정 MySQL 데이터베이스에 연결합니다.database매개변수: 연결할 데이터베이스의 이름(문자열)연결이 성공하면 확인 메시지를 반환합니다.
execute_query: MySQL 쿼리를 실행합니다.query매개변수: 실행할 SQL 쿼리(문자열)JSON 형식으로 쿼리 결과를 반환합니다.
여러 개의 쿼리를 세미콜론으로 구분하여 보낼 수 있습니다.
구성
서버는 다음과 같은 환경 변수를 사용합니다.
MYSQL_HOST: MySQL 서버 주소(기본값: "localhost")MYSQL_USER: MySQL 사용자 이름(기본값: "root")MYSQL_PASSWORD: MySQL 비밀번호(기본값: "")MYSQL_DATABASE: 초기 데이터베이스(선택 사항)MYSQL_READONLY: 읽기 전용 모드(활성화하려면 1/true로 설정, 기본값: false)
빠른 시작
설치
클로드 데스크탑
MacOS: ~/Library/Application\ Support/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json
윈도우: %APPDATA%/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json
{
"mcpServers": {
"mysqldb-mcp-server": {
"command": "uv",
"args": [
"--directory",
"/Users/burakdirin/Projects/mysqldb-mcp-server",
"run",
"mysqldb-mcp-server"
],
"env": {
"MYSQL_HOST": "localhost",
"MYSQL_USER": "root",
"MYSQL_PASSWORD": "password",
"MYSQL_DATABASE": "[optional]",
"MYSQL_READONLY": "true"
}
}
}
}{
"mcpServers": {
"mysqldb-mcp-server": {
"command": "uvx",
"args": [
"mysqldb-mcp-server"
],
"env": {
"MYSQL_HOST": "localhost",
"MYSQL_USER": "root",
"MYSQL_PASSWORD": "password",
"MYSQL_DATABASE": "[optional]",
"MYSQL_READONLY": "true"
}
}
}
}Smithery를 통해 설치
Smithery를 통해 Claude Desktop용 MySQL 데이터베이스 통합 서버를 자동으로 설치하려면:
npx -y @smithery/cli install @burakdirin/mysqldb-mcp-server --client claude개발
건축 및 출판
배포를 위해 패키지를 준비하려면:
종속성 동기화 및 잠금 파일 업데이트:
uv sync패키지 배포 빌드:
uv build이렇게 하면 dist/ 디렉토리에 소스와 휠 배포판이 생성됩니다.
PyPI에 게시:
uv publish참고: 환경 변수나 명령 플래그를 통해 PyPI 자격 증명을 설정해야 합니다.
토큰:
--token또는UV_PUBLISH_TOKEN또는 사용자 이름/비밀번호:
--username/UV_PUBLISH_USERNAME및--password/UV_PUBLISH_PASSWORD
디버깅
MCP 서버는 stdio를 통해 실행되므로 디버깅이 어려울 수 있습니다. 최상의 디버깅 환경을 위해서는 MCP Inspector 사용을 강력히 권장합니다.
다음 명령을 사용하여 npm 통해 MCP Inspector를 시작할 수 있습니다.
npx @modelcontextprotocol/inspector uv --directory /Users/burakdirin/Projects/mysqldb-mcp-server run mysqldb-mcp-serverInspector를 실행하면 브라우저에서 접근하여 디버깅을 시작할 수 있는 URL이 표시됩니다.
Available Tools
2 toolsconnect_databaseC
Connect to a specific MySQL database
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| database | Yes |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the action but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether this establishes a persistent connection, requires authentication, has rate limits, or what happens on failure. For a connection tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves critical operational details unspecified.
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, clear sentence with no wasted words, making it easy to parse and front-loaded with essential information. Every word earns its place by specifying the action and target.
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?
Given the tool's complexity (establishing a database connection), lack of annotations, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description is insufficient. It doesn't cover what the tool returns, error conditions, or dependencies with the sibling 'execute_query' tool, leaving too many gaps for effective use.
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 0%, and the description adds no parameter information beyond implying a 'database' parameter exists. It doesn't explain what the 'database' parameter represents (e.g., database name, connection string), valid values, or format, failing to compensate for the schema's lack of descriptions.
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 clearly states the action ('Connect to') and target resource ('a specific MySQL database'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't explicitly distinguish from the sibling 'execute_query' tool, but the verb 'connect' versus 'execute' implies different operations.
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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, prerequisites, or contextual constraints. With a sibling tool 'execute_query' available, there's no indication of whether connection must precede query execution or if they can be used independently.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
execute_queryC
Execute MySQL queries
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes |
TDQS
Does 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 but fails to do so. It doesn't mention whether this is a read-only or destructive operation, authentication requirements, error handling, rate limits, or what the response looks like. For a database query tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a critical gap in transparency.
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 extremely concise with just three words, front-loaded and free of unnecessary information. Every word ('Execute MySQL queries') directly contributes to the core purpose, making it efficient in structure, though this brevity contributes to gaps in other dimensions.
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?
Given the complexity of a database query tool, lack of annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is completely inadequate. It fails to address key aspects like behavioral traits, parameter details, return values, or usage context, making it insufficient for effective agent tool invocation.
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?
The schema description coverage is 0%, meaning the input schema provides no descriptions for the 'query' parameter. The description 'Execute MySQL queries' adds no meaningful semantics beyond the parameter name—it doesn't explain the expected format, syntax, constraints, or examples for the query. This leaves the parameter entirely undocumented.
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 'Execute MySQL queries' clearly states the verb ('execute') and resource ('MySQL queries'), making the purpose understandable. However, it lacks specificity about what types of queries are supported (e.g., SELECT, INSERT, UPDATE) and doesn't distinguish from the sibling tool 'connect_database', which appears to be a different operation. This makes it vague but not tautological.
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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling 'connect_database' or other alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., whether a database connection must be established first), use cases, or exclusions. This leaves the agent with no contextual direction for tool selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Tool Schema Changelog
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
2 tool updates
v1.0.0- First observed
connect_database - First observed
execute_query
TDQS
Scored across 2 tools
The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: connect_database handles database connections, while execute_query handles query execution. There is no overlap or ambiguity between these functions, making it easy for an agent to select the correct tool based on the task.
Both tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (connect_database and execute_query), using snake_case throughout. This predictable naming scheme enhances readability and reduces confusion for agents interacting with the server.
With only 2 tools, the server feels under-scoped for a MySQL database management system. Core operations like creating tables, inserting data, or managing schemas are missing, which limits its utility for typical database workflows. This count is too low for the apparent domain.
The tool surface is severely incomplete for MySQL database operations. While connecting and executing queries are foundational, there are significant gaps in CRUD operations (e.g., no create, read, update, or delete tools), schema management, or data manipulation, which will likely cause agent failures in real-world scenarios.
Maintenance
Related MCP Connectors
Hosted MCP server connecting claude.ai, ChatGPT and other AI apps to your own computer
- mcpOAuthcom.gibsonai
GibsonAI MCP server: manage your databases with natural language
MCP server unifying ERPs, CRMs, APIs and knowledge base for Claude, ChatGPT and Gemini.
Text-to-SQL MCP server: read-only queries on PostgreSQL, MySQL and SQL Server with your real schema
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceMCP server that allows Claude AI to interact directly with MySQL databases, enabling query execution and table information retrieval through natural language.14 npm4MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityNot gradedmaintenanceAn MCP server that enables interaction with MySQL databases through the Model Context Protocol, allowing execution of SQL queries and database table listing operations from Cline AI.-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceMySQL MCP Server enables Claude Desktop and Claude Code to execute SQL queries, explore databases, Webview to add or enable Databases, Connections, and interact with your MySQL data - all through a secure, permission-controlled interface.134 npm1MIT
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceMCP server for Claude that connects to MySQL, MariaDB, and SQLite databases. Query your databases using natural language.3MIT