neon-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Score Discussions Admin

Run a NEON GraphQL query

neon_graphql

Read-onlyIdempotent

Run read-only GraphQL queries against NEON's public metadata endpoint to retrieve data shapes not covered by other tools, with response pruning and type introspection.

Instructions

Read-only GraphQL against NEON's public metadata endpoint for shapes the other tools do not cover. Guard rails: queries only, allow-listed root fields, depth <= 8, one __type/__schema, results pruned to max_bytes with truncatedPaths. No token is sent. Prefer the dedicated tools for products, sites and availability. Next: read neon://reference/graphql-schema for types.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`query`	No	A read-only GraphQL query against https://data.neonscience.org/graphql (roots: products, product, filterProducts, sites, site, filterSites, location, locationHierarchy, findLocations, prototypeDatasets, prototypeDataset, one __type).
`max_bytes`	No	Response budget; larger lists are pruned.
`variables`	No	GraphQL variables.
`operation_name`	No	Operation to run when the document has several.
`introspect_type`	No	Instead of a query: describe one GraphQL type (e.g. Site, DataProductFilter).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`data`	No
`notes`	No
`errors`	No
`source`	No
`resolved`	No
`nextSteps`	No
`truncated`	No
`bytesTotal`	Yes
`schemaHint`	No	neon://reference/graphql-schema
`truncatedPaths`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the readOnlyHint/idempotentHint annotations by disclosing specific guard rails: allow-listed root fields, depth <= 8, one __type/__schema call, byte-budget pruning with truncatedPaths, and 'No token is sent.' This gives the agent strong operational expectations before calling.

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?

Four dense sentences deliver purpose, constraints, alternatives, and next-step guidance without redundancy or filler. The most important scoping information is front-loaded before guard rails and routing advice.

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?

For a generic GraphQL fallback tool with an output schema, the description covers access type, resource, safety limits, response pruning behavior, authentication expectations, routing to dedicated siblings, and a pointer for schema details. Nothing operationally critical 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 each parameter already has meaningful descriptions, so the description does not need to repeat them. The description adds related behavioral context (pruning, guard rails) but not per-parameter semantics, keeping this at the baseline score for full schema coverage.

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: read-only GraphQL against NEON's public metadata endpoint. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly positioning the tool as covering shapes 'the other tools do not cover,' preventing confusion with the many dedicated product/site/availability tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Provides clear usage guidance: use for shapes other tools do not cover, and prefer dedicated tools for products, sites, and availability. It also warns that only query operations are allowed and points the agent to read the schema reference for types, giving practical direction for correct invocation.

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