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 views

list_views
Read-only

Lists views and materialized views in a PostgreSQL schema with their names, materialized status, and SELECT definitions, enabling schema inspection and migration.

Instructions

List the views and materialized views in a schema, with their definitions. Returns a list of objects with name, materialized (bool), and definition (the SELECT SQL).

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": {
      "schema": "<schema>"
    },
    "name": "list_views"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
schemaYes
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

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully adds the result shape (name, materialized bool, definition SELECT SQL), but says nothing about ordering, whether views in other schemas are included, permission requirements, or the secondary-database targeting 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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and scope, then the return shape. Every clause carries information; nothing is repeated or padded.

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 simple read-only catalog listing with an output schema present, this is close to complete: the scope and the returned fields are both stated. Minor gaps remain around the undocumented `schema` parameter format and whether the listing spans only the given schema.

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 coverage is 50%: the optional `database` parameter is well documented in the schema itself (configured secondary read-only id, invalid names rejected), but the required `schema` parameter has no schema description at all. The description only implicitly conveys that `schema` scopes the listing and does not state its format (e.g. qualified vs unqualified, case sensitivity).

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?

A specific verb plus a specific resource: 'List the views and materialized views in a schema, with their definitions.' The resource (views/materialized views) is narrow enough that an agent can separate it from the many other list_* siblings (list_tables, list_indexes, list_functions) without opening the schema. It stops short of 5 because no sibling is named or contrasted 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 only implied: mentioning 'with their definitions' signals the tool is for inspecting view SQL rather than just enumerating names. There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no statement of when to prefer e.g. list_tables or describe_table, and no prerequisite or exclusion guidance.

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