Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
kernl

kernl

by fastslack
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

kernel_graph_query

Run a read-only Cypher query on Kernl's graph and return capped rows after validating for writes, unsafe paths, and invalid labels or relationship types.

Instructions

Run one READ-ONLY Cypher query on Kernl's graph and get rows back. It is checked before it runs: no writing, only db.* read procedures, bounded variable-length paths (at most 6 hops), connected patterns, and labels and relationship types that exist (wrong ones come back with suggestions). Rows are capped by limit.

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": {
      "cypher": "<cypher>"
    },
    "name": "kernel_graph_query"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
cypherYes
paramsNoQuery parameters ($name).

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.5.1

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does substantial work: it discloses pre-execution validation, write rejection, db.* read-procedure restriction, a 6-hop bound on variable-length paths, connected-pattern and label/relationship-type validation with suggestions on failure. The main omissions are permission/auth requirements and what errors or empty results look like.

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?

Three tight sentences with the action front-loaded and the validation rules packed compactly behind it. Every clause conveys a distinct constraint; no filler or restatement of the name.

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 exists, so return-shape explanation is rightly omitted, and the validation/hop/limit rules cover the behavior an agent needs to form a valid query. The missing pieces are routing guidance versus sibling query tools and any note on permissions or error surfacing.

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 33%, so the description must help, and it explains that `limit` caps returned rows (default 50 is already in the schema). It adds nothing about `params` beyond the schema's own '$name' note, and never states that `cypher` takes a Cypher string, leaving a meaningful gap.

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 concrete verb and resource ('Run one READ-ONLY Cypher query on Kernl's graph and get rows back'), which immediately distinguishes it from natural-language or fact-oriented siblings. It does not explicitly name an alternative (e.g. kernel_graph_ask or kernel_facts_query), so the differentiation is implied by the Cypher mechanism rather than stated.

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 — reach for this when you want raw Cypher instead of a higher-level query tool — but no when-to-use/when-not-to-use statement or named alternative appears. The constraints given (read-only, no writes) are execution rules rather than selection 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