Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MCPg - Production-grade PostgreSQL MCP Server

MCPg - Production-grade PostgreSQL MCP Server

by devopam
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Get skip scan status

get_skip_scan_status
Read-only

Checks whether PostgreSQL 19's B-tree skip-scan optimization is the planner default, and returns guidance for older servers to use a dedicated single-column index.

Instructions

Report whether PG 19's B-tree skip-scan optimisation is the planner default on this server. Never raises — driver-level errors surface as available=false. On PG ≤ 18 reports available=false and points the agent at the standard 'add a dedicated single-column index' fallback. Returns an object with available (bool), server_version_num (int), server_version, and detail (guidance string).

Example: get_skip_scan_status()

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": "get_skip_scan_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
databaseNoOptional: a database id from list_databases, to target a configured secondary (read-only) database; omit for the primary. Database names that are not configured ids are rejected.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
detailYes
availableYes
server_versionYes
server_version_numYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.8.4
    • changedInput schema / properties / database / description
      Previous value: -"Optional: target a configured secondary (read-only) database by name; omit for the primary. Call list_databases to see the configured ids."New value: +"Optional: a database id from list_databases, to target a configured secondary (read-only) database; omit for the primary. Database names that are not configured ids are rejected."
  2. First observedv0.6.8

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well past the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations by disclosing that the tool never raises, that driver-level errors surface as available=false, and how behaviour differs on PG ≤ 18 versus PG 19. These are exactly the runtime traits an agent needs to interpret a failure-free response.

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?

Front-loaded with the core answer, followed by error semantics, version fallback, and return shape, then a short example. Four compact sentences with little waste, though the return-field enumeration partially duplicates the output schema.

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?

An output schema and annotations exist, so the description need not explain return values, and it still adds error-handling and version-gating context. The only gap is the absence of any mention of the secondary-database targeting parameter, which the schema carries on its own.

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 the single optional `database` parameter is fully documented in the schema, so the baseline applies. The description never mentions the parameter and its example call `get_skip_scan_status()` uses no arguments, adding no meaning beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: report whether PG 19's B-tree skip-scan optimisation is the planner default on this server. The version-gated framing and the named fallback ('add a dedicated single-column index') make it distinguishable from the sibling recommend_skip_scan_indexes without opening a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied by the purpose (checking planner default status) and the description explains the next step on PG ≤ 18, but it never states when to call this versus recommend_skip_scan_indexes or why_is_this_slow, nor any exclusions. Guidance is inferable rather than explicit.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools