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

List autowarm jobs

list_autowarm_jobs
Read-only

List pg_cron jobs registered for autowarm to inspect schedules and commands; returns an empty list when pg_cron is not installed.

Instructions

List the pg_cron jobs MCPg registered for autowarm (jobname LIKE 'mcpg_autowarm%'). Returns an empty list when pg_cron is not installed. Returns a list of objects with jobid, jobname, schedule (the cron expression), and command (the SELECT the job runs).

Example: list_autowarm_jobs()

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_autowarm_jobs"
  }
}

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
resultYes

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

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations, the description discloses a genuine behavioral edge case: an empty list is returned when pg_cron is not installed, so the agent will not misread an empty result as an error. It also describes the returned fields, though the output schema already covers that.

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 scope-defining filter is front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by the edge case and return shape. The trailing example call is marginally useful for a zero-required-parameter tool and the field list partly duplicates the output schema.

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?

With annotations carrying the safety profile, a fully documented parameter schema, and an output schema for return values, the description supplies the one thing structured fields cannot: the autowarm-specific filter and the pg_cron-absent behavior. Nothing needed 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 description coverage is 100% and the `database` parameter is thoroughly documented in the schema (secondary read-only target, id from list_databases, invalid names rejected). The description adds nothing about it, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

The description gives a specific verb and resource (list pg_cron jobs) and narrows the scope precisely to jobs MCPg registered for autowarm via the `jobname LIKE 'mcpg_autowarm%'` predicate. That filter effectively separates it from `list_cron_jobs`, though the sibling is never 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 Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied rather than stated: an agent can infer this is for inspecting autowarm-specific cron jobs. There is no explicit when-to-use versus `list_cron_jobs` or `list_timescale_jobs`, and no statement of prerequisites such as autowarm having been configured first.

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