Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
DuckPond MCP Server

DuckPond MCP Server

by jordanburke
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

query

Run a SQL statement on a user's DuckDB database and retrieve the query results.

Instructions

Execute a SQL query for a specific user and return results

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "sql": "<sql>"
    },
    "name": "query"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
userIdNoUser identifier (optional if DUCKPOND_DEFAULT_USER is set)
sqlYesSQL query to execute

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.5.1
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  2. First observedv0.4.4

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must carry full behavioral burden. It only states it executes and returns results, but does not disclose whether queries are read-only, destructive, or require specific permissions, which is critical for a SQL tool.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the verb. However, it could be expanded with more context without harming conciseness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the complexity of SQL execution and lack of output schema or annotations, the description is inadequate. It omits details on error handling, permission requirements, and result format.

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% and the schema already describes both parameters adequately. The description adds little beyond 'for a specific user', which is already hinted in the userId description.

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 verb 'Execute' and the resource 'SQL query', and specifies it is for a specific user, which distinguishes it from a general SQL execution tool like 'execute'.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this versus sibling tools like 'execute' or 'getUserStats'. The description implies user-specific queries but does not provide explicit usage context or exclusions.

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