aapanel-mcp

Import a SQL dump

db_import_sql

Import an existing .sql file from the panel host into a specified database, enabling direct SQL restores without uploading files through the server.

Instructions

Import a .sql file that already exists on the panel host into a database. The file must be on the panel machine, not uploaded by this server.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "name": "<name>",
      "file": "<file>"
    },
    "name": "db_import_sql"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`file`	Yes	Absolute path to the .sql file on the panel host.
`name`	Yes	Target database name.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.1-alpha.0Sep 29, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=false, destructive=false, openWorld=true and idempotent=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the genuinely useful constraint that the file must be host-local rather than uploaded, but says nothing about overwriting existing data, permissions, or failure behavior.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and immediately followed by the critical host-locality constraint. No filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden but the operation's result is obvious (import success/failure). Annotations cover the safety profile and the schema documents both parameters, so only edge behavior like overwriting an existing database is unaddressed.

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 description coverage is 100% and both parameters are already documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no format or syntax detail beyond restating that the file must be on the panel host.

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?

States a specific verb (Import) and resource (.sql file into a database) with the scope constraint that the file lives on the panel host. It implicitly distinguishes itself from db_restore and db_backup, though it never names a sibling to make the boundary explicit.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives a clear precondition and an exclusion: the file must already exist on the panel machine and is not uploaded by this server. That tells the agent when this tool applies, but it doesn't point to alternatives such as db_restore or db_sync_from_server.

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

Deploy Server