Skip to main content
Glama
foxter-io

PostgreSQL MCP Server

by foxter-io

List PostgreSQL Triggers

pg_list_triggers
Read-onlyIdempotent

List all triggers in a PostgreSQL schema, with optional filtering by table, to view trigger details like event, timing, and statement.

Instructions

List all triggers in a schema, optionally filtered by table.

Args:

  • schema: Schema name (default: public)

  • table: Filter to a specific table (optional)

  • response_format: Output format

Returns: JSON: { triggers: TriggerInfo[], count: number } Markdown: table with trigger name, table, event, timing, orientation, and statement

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
schemaNoPostgreSQL schema name (default: public)public
tableNoFilter to a specific table (optional)
response_formatNoOutput format: 'markdown' for human-readable, 'json' for machine-readablemarkdown
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds some value by specifying return formats (JSON/Markdown), but no new behavioral traits beyond what annotations provide.

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?

The description is concise, front-loaded with the main action, and includes necessary parameter and return details without wasted words.

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 listing tool with safety annotations, the description adequately covers purpose, parameters, and return format. No output schema, but the return description suffices.

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 100%; the description repeats parameter info without adding new semantics beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description clearly states it lists triggers in a schema, optionally filtered by table. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like pg_list_functions or pg_list_tables.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives. Usage is implied by the tool's purpose (listing triggers), but no when-not-to-use or comparative context is provided.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/foxter-io/mcp-postgresql'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server