Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
CASDA MCP Server

CASDA MCP Server

by jbwod
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

List CASDA tables

casda_list_tables
Read-onlyIdempotent

List database tables from TAP_SCHEMA, filtered by schema name, with cursor pagination for large result sets.

Instructions

List TAP_SCHEMA tables, optionally filtered by schema, with cursor pagination.

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": "casda_list_tables"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cursorNoOpaque next-page cursor from a previous table list response.
page_sizeNoNumber of tables to return; bounded by server configuration.
schema_nameNoOptional TAP schema filter such as ivoa, casda, TAP_SCHEMA, or AS102.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
errorNo
tablesNo
paginationNo
provenanceNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds cursor pagination and optional filtering, which is useful context but does not contradict annotations. It doesn't elaborate on behavior without filters (e.g., lists all) or pagination limits.

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?

Single sentence that is front-loaded with the main action and includes key details (filtered by schema, cursor pagination). No redundant 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?

Given the tool's simplicity, strong annotations, and presence of an output schema, the description covers the core functionality (listing with filtering and pagination). No major gaps, though it could hint at default behavior when no schema is given.

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%, so parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description briefly mentions filtering and pagination but adds no additional semantics beyond the schema definitions. 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 the action ('List TAP_SCHEMA tables') with optional filtering and pagination. It distinguishes from siblings like casda_list_schemas (lists schemas) and casda_describe_table (describes a specific table).

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?

The description mentions optional schema filtering but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., casda_list_schemas, casda_describe_table). No when-not-to-use or alternative naming is provided.

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