Airtable MCP Server

list_governance

Retrieve governance allow-lists and PII masking policies to audit or enforce data access controls in Airtable MCP workflows.

Instructions

Return governance allow-lists and PII masking policies.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_governance"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Default
`piiFields`	No
`allowedBases`	Yes
`allowedTables`	No
`loggingPolicy`	No	minimal
`retentionDays`	No
`redactionPolicy`	No	mask_on_inline
`allowedOperations`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv3.2.7Nov 8, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. The verb "Return" implies a read, but the description says nothing about whether this is tenant-wide or scoped, whether special permissions are needed to view PII masking policies, or how large the response may be.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It states the returned resources immediately, which is exactly what an agent scanning tool lists needs.

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?

The tool is low-complexity: no inputs and a declared output schema, so return values need no prose explanation. The only shortfall is behavioral context such as scope and permission requirements, which has to substitute for the missing annotations.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline for a parameterless tool applies. The schema is trivially complete and the description correctly implies the entire governance configuration is returned with no filtering options.

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?

"Return governance allow-lists and PII masking policies" names a specific verb and two concrete resources, making the tool's output domain clear at a glance. The noun "governance" plus "PII masking" distinguishes it from generic listing siblings like list_bases or list_webhooks, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives. An agent must infer from the name alone that this is for inspecting governance configuration rather than, say, exceptions, which are exposed separately via list_exceptions.

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

Deploy Server