Skip to main content
Glama
jonasliesas

singlestore-mcp-server

by jonasliesas
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

sql_editor_reply

Read-only

Send an answer to an open SQL Editor chat panel, formatting SQL in fenced code blocks to enable Replace, Insert, and Copy buttons.

Instructions

Send an answer to the chat panel of an open SQL Editor app.

Use this to answer a message that arrived from the SQL Editor (it starts
with "[SQL Editor <editor_id>]"), or when the user asks you to put SQL into
their open editor (the editor reports its id in the model context). The
message is plain text; put SQL in ```sql fenced blocks - each block gets
Replace / Insert / Copy buttons in the editor. Keep explanations short.
After calling this, reply briefly in the chat as well.

Args:
    editor_id: The editor's id, e.g. "e-4f9a2c".
    message: The answer, with SQL in ```sql fenced blocks.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
messageYes
editor_idYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.8.1

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint=true annotation, the description discloses real rendering behavior: the message is plain text, and ```sql fenced blocks become Replace/Insert/Copy buttons in the editor. That is useful operational context not captured by annotations or schema. It does not cover failure modes (invalid or closed editor_id), and there is mild tension between a 'Send' action and readOnlyHint.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the action in sentence one, then usage, then output-format guidance, then the follow-up instruction. All sentences earn their place, though the phrasing is slightly verbose and could be tightened without losing information.

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 values need not be explained. The description covers what the tool does, when to call it, how to format the payload, and the required follow-up chat message. Only error/precondition behavior (editor not open, bad id) is left unspecified.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% and neither property has a schema description, so the description carries the burden and largely delivers: editor_id is explained with a concrete example ('e-4f9a2c') and message is characterized as plain text with SQL in fenced blocks. Format details beyond that (allowed length, escaping) are absent.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Send an answer to the chat panel of an open SQL Editor app.' The added routing rule ('answer a message that arrived from the SQL Editor... [SQL Editor <editor_id>]') makes the scope unambiguous, though no sibling (e.g. sql_editor_ask) is named for direct contrast.

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?

Gives two concrete triggers for use: answering a message that starts with '[SQL Editor <editor_id>]', and when the user asks you to place SQL into their open editor. It also specifies a post-call step ('reply briefly in the chat as well'), but names no alternative tool to use instead in other situations.

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