MCP PostgreSQL Operations

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

get_postgresql_config

Retrieve and analyze PostgreSQL configuration parameter values, descriptions, and change/restart requirements. Filter by name or text for performance tuning insights.

Instructions

[Tool Purpose]: Retrieve and analyze PostgreSQL server configuration parameter values

[Exact Functionality]:

Retrieve all PostgreSQL configuration parameters (when config_name is not specified)
Retrieve current value and description of specific configuration parameter
Filter configurations by text pattern (when filter_text is specified)
Display whether configuration can be changed and if restart is required

[Required Use Cases]:

When user requests "PostgreSQL config", "config", "parameters", etc.
When checking specific configuration values is needed
When searching for configurations containing specific text
When configuration status identification is needed for performance tuning

[Strictly Prohibited Use Cases]:

Requests for configuration value changes or modifications
Requests for PostgreSQL restart or reload
Requests for system-level configuration changes

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`config_name`	No	Specific configuration parameter name to retrieve (shows all configs if omitted)
`filter_text`	No	Text to filter configuration names or descriptions (optional)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv3.4.3Oct 27, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / config_name / description

Added value: +"Specific configuration parameter name to retrieve (shows all configs if omitted)"

addedInput schema / properties / filter_text / description

Added value: +"Text to filter configuration names or descriptions (optional)"

Changed9 schema fields changedv3.4.2Oct 25, 2026
- addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```
- addedInput schema / properties / config_name / anyOf
```
Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
```
- removedInput schema / properties / config_name / title
```
Removed value: -"Config Name"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / config_name / type
```
Removed value: -"string"
```
- addedInput schema / properties / filter_text / anyOf
```
Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
```
- removedInput schema / properties / filter_text / title
```
Removed value: -"Filter Text"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / filter_text / type
```
Removed value: -"string"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / result / title
```
Removed value: -"Result"
```
- removedOutput schema / title
```
Removed value: -"_WrappedResult"
```
Addedv1.0.0Jan 3, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does well: the prohibited-use section makes clear this is a read-only tool that cannot change or restart anything, and it discloses that output includes changeability and restart-required flags. It stops short of stating the response format or pagination/limits, so not a full 5.

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 bracketed section headers front-load purpose, functionality, and use cases, and each bullet is a discrete fact. It is somewhat verbose and the functionality bullets partially duplicate the use-case bullets, keeping it below a 5.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the description already covers modes, filtering, and safety boundaries. For a two-optional-parameter read tool, nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description restates the same behavior (all configs when config_name omitted, text filtering with filter_text) without adding syntax, matching rules, or format details beyond the schema, so baseline 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?

The description opens with a specific verb+resource ('Retrieve and analyze PostgreSQL server configuration parameter values') and enumerates exactly what is returned in each mode. An agent can distinguish this from the many sibling stats/monitoring tools because it is explicitly about configuration parameters.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It provides both a '[Required Use Cases]' list of triggering scenarios and a '[Strictly Prohibited Use Cases]' list that rules out mutation, restart, and system-level changes. This is explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance, leaving little to inference.

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

Deploy Server