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 hypertables

list_hypertables
Read-only

List TimescaleDB hypertables visible to the current role, including chunk counts, compression status, and total size, and report when the extension is unavailable.

Instructions

List every TimescaleDB hypertable visible to the current role, with chunk count, compression flag, and total size. Reports available=false when the timescaledb extension is not installed. Returns an object with available (bool) and hypertables (list of {schema, table, num_chunks, compression_enabled, total_size_bytes}).

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_hypertables"
  }
}

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
availableYes
hypertablesYes

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

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered; the description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond that: visibility is limited by the current role and the tool degrades gracefully with available=false when the extension is absent. It doesn't discuss cost or whether chunk counts are computed live on large catalogs, which keeps it short of a 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?

Three tight, front-loaded sentences: purpose and scope first, edge case second, return shape last. The final sentence restates the return object field-by-field even though an output schema exists, which is redundant but not harmful.

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?

For a zero-required-parameter listing tool with annotations and an output schema, this covers purpose, role-based visibility, and extension-absence handling. The only omission is any mention of the secondary read-only database option, which the schema happens to document adequately.

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?

There is a single optional parameter whose schema description already fully explains secondary-database targeting and the rejection of arbitrary names (100% coverage). The prose adds nothing about it, so the baseline 3 for schema-covered parameters 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?

States a specific verb and resource ("List every TimescaleDB hypertable") plus the scope ("visible to the current role") and the exact fields reported (chunk count, compression flag, total size). That combination cleanly separates it from neighbors like list_chunks and get_hypertable_stats without needing to name them.

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 resource and by the note that it reports available=false when TimescaleDB isn't installed, which tells the agent to call it as a capability probe. However, it never says when to prefer this over list_chunks or get_hypertable_stats, nor any when-not conditions.

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