magento-sql-mcp-server

Run Database Health Check

run_database_health_check

Read-onlyIdempotent

Run a quick health check to reveal database connection status, Magento edition, indexer issues, failed cron jobs in the last 24 hours, and queue backlog.

Instructions

Single-call health snapshot: connection, edition detection, indexer issues, failed crons (24h), queue backlog summary. Does NOT replace individual diagnostic tools for deep dives.

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": "run_database_health_check"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`profile`	No	Override the MAGENTO_SQL_PROFILE env var for this call only. Use list_connection_profiles to see available names.
`magentoRoot`	No	Absolute path to the Magento root (must contain app/etc/env.php). Defaults to MAGENTO_ROOT env var or auto-discovery.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`note`	No
`rows`	Yes
`sampled`	No
`rowCount`	Yes
`truncated`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.4.0Aug 25, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: it aggregates multiple sources into a single call, includes a 24-hour window for cron failures, and signals that the result is a summary rather than a deep dive. This is exactly the supplementary context the description should 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?

Two sentences, no filler. The purpose and scope are front-loaded, and the caveat about deep dives is placed at the end. Every clause earns its place; ideal conciseness.

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?

The tool has an output schema (not shown, but indicated), so return-value details are redundant in the description. It has no required parameters, and the description fully covers what the health check inspects and its limitations. An agent can decide to invoke it correctly with no ambiguity.

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?

Both parameters (profile and magentoRoot) are fully described in the input schema (100% coverage), so the schema carries the semantic weight. The description does not add parameter-level detail, but it doesn't need to; the baseline of 3 is appropriate when the schema is complete.

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 a specific verb+resource ('run health check') and enumerates the concrete components: connection, edition detection, indexer issues, failed crons (24h), queue backlog summary. It also differentiates from siblings by framing itself as a 'single-call snapshot' and explicitly noting it does not replace individual diagnostic tools.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description explicitly provides a when-not instruction: 'Does NOT replace individual diagnostic tools for deep dives.' This implies the tool is for quick overviews and directs the agent toward sibling tools for detailed investigation. It does not name specific alternative tools, but the exclusion is clear and actionable.

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

Deploy Server