Skip to main content
Glama
deenesjakoruzh
kuzudb

Kuzu MCP server

Official
by kuzudb
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

쿠즈-mcp-서버

Kuzu 데이터베이스에 대한 액세스를 제공하는 모델 컨텍스트 프로토콜 서버입니다. 이 서버를 통해 LLM은 데이터베이스 스키마를 검사하고 제공된 Kuzu 데이터베이스에서 쿼리를 실행할 수 있습니다.

구성 요소

도구

  • getSchema

    • 모든 노드와 관계 테이블 및 해당 속성을 포함하여 Kuzu 데이터베이스의 전체 스키마를 가져옵니다.

    • 입력: 없음

  • 질문

    • Kuzu 데이터베이스에서 Cypher 쿼리 실행

    • 입력: cypher (문자열): 실행할 Cypher 쿼리

즉각적인

  • KuzuCypher 생성

    • Kuzu에 대한 Cypher 쿼리 생성

    • 인수: question (문자열): Cypher 쿼리를 생성하기 위한 자연어 질문

Related MCP server: MCP-Python

Claude Desktop과 함께 사용

Docker 사용(권장)

  • 구성 파일 config.json 편집합니다.

    • macOS: ~/Library/Application Support/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json

    • Windows의 경우: %APPDATA%\Claude\claude_desktop_config.json

  • mcpServers 개체에 다음 구성을 추가합니다.

    지엑스피1

    {Absolute Path to the Kuzu database} 를 실제 경로로 변경합니다.

  • Claude Desktop을 다시 시작하세요

Node.js와 npm(개발용)

  • 종속성 설치: npm install

  • 구성 파일 config.json 편집합니다.

    • macOS: ~/Library/Application Support/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json

    • Windows의 경우: %APPDATA%\Claude\claude_desktop_config.json

  • mcpServers 개체에 다음 구성을 추가합니다.

    {
  "mcpServers": {
      "kuzu": {
          "command": "node",
          "args": [
              "{Absolute Path to this repository}/index.js",
              "{Absolute Path to the Kuzu database}",
          ]
      }
  }
}

    {Absolute Path to this repository} 및 {Absolute Path to the Kuzu database} 실제 경로로 변경합니다.

  • Claude Desktop을 다시 시작하세요

읽기 전용 모드

KUZU_READ_ONLY 환경 변수를 true 로 설정하면 서버를 읽기 전용 모드로 실행할 수 있습니다. 이 모드에서는 데이터베이스를 수정하려는 모든 쿼리를 실행하면 오류가 발생합니다. 이 플래그는 구성 파일에서 다음과 같이 설정할 수 있습니다.

{
    "mcpServers": {
        "kuzu": {
            "command": "docker",
            "args": [
                "run",
                "-v",
                "{Absolute Path to the Kuzu database}:/database",
                "-e",
                "KUZU_READ_ONLY=true",
                "--rm",
                "-i",
                "kuzudb/mcp-server"
            ],
        }
    }
}

Available Tools

2 tools
getSchemaB

Get the schema of the Kuzu database

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No parameters

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states what the tool does but doesn't describe how it behaves—e.g., whether it returns a full schema, requires permissions, has side effects, or handles errors. This leaves significant gaps for a tool that interacts with a database.

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?

The description is a single, direct sentence with no wasted words, clearly front-loading the core purpose. It's appropriately sized for a simple tool with no parameters, making it highly efficient and easy to parse.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (simple, no parameters) and lack of annotations and output schema, the description is minimally adequate but incomplete. It states what the tool does but doesn't cover behavioral aspects like return format or error handling, which are important for a database tool, leaving room for improvement.

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?

The tool has 0 parameters, and the input schema has 100% description coverage (though empty). The description doesn't need to compensate for missing parameter info, so it meets the baseline of 4 for tools with no parameters, as it doesn't mislead about inputs.

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?

The description clearly states the action ('Get') and the resource ('schema of the Kuzu database'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from its sibling tool 'query' (which likely executes queries rather than retrieving metadata), so it doesn't reach the highest score.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like the 'query' sibling tool. It lacks context about scenarios where retrieving the schema is appropriate, such as for database exploration or query planning, leaving usage entirely implicit.

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

queryC

Run a Cypher query on the Kuzu database

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cypherNoThe Cypher query to run

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure but only states the basic function. It doesn't mention whether this is a read-only or write operation, what permissions are required, potential side effects, error handling, or any limitations like query complexity or timeout constraints.

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?

The description is extremely concise - a single sentence that directly states the tool's purpose with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the essential information and contains no unnecessary elaboration.

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?

For a database query tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what kind of results to expect, error conditions, or the fact that this appears to be a general-purpose query tool versus the schema-specific sibling. The agent lacks crucial context for proper tool selection and invocation.

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%, so the schema already documents the single 'cypher' parameter. The description doesn't add any additional meaning about parameter usage beyond what the schema provides, maintaining the baseline score for high schema coverage.

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?

The description clearly states the action ('Run a Cypher query') and target resource ('on the Kuzu database'), providing specific verb+resource pairing. However, it doesn't differentiate from the sibling tool 'getSchema' - both could involve querying but for different purposes.

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 is provided about when to use this tool versus the sibling 'getSchema' tool, nor any context about appropriate use cases. The description simply states what the tool does without indicating when it should be selected over alternatives.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 2 tool updatesv1.0.0
    • First observedgetSchema
    • First observedquery
Deploy Server
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Scored across 2 tools

Disambiguation5/5

The two tools have completely distinct purposes: getSchema retrieves database structure metadata, while query executes data retrieval/manipulation operations. There is no overlap or ambiguity between these functions, making tool selection straightforward for an agent.

Naming Consistency5/5

Both tools follow a consistent verb_noun naming pattern (getSchema, query). While 'query' is a noun rather than verb_noun, it's a standard database term that pairs naturally with 'getSchema', maintaining clear and predictable naming throughout the minimal toolset.

Tool Count2/5

With only 2 tools, this server feels severely under-scoped for a database interface. A typical database MCP server would include tools for data manipulation (insert, update, delete), transaction management, connection handling, or at least parameterized queries beyond just raw query execution.

Completeness2/5

For a database server, the surface is significantly incomplete. While getSchema and query provide read capabilities, there are no tools for data modification (insert/update/delete), transaction control, connection management, or even parameterized query execution. This creates dead ends for agents needing to perform basic database operations.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

  • MCP Neo4j Server

    da-okazaki
    A
    license
    B
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    This server enables interaction between Neo4j databases and Claude Desktop, allowing users to execute Cypher queries, create nodes, and establish relationships in the database.
    3
    111 npm
    59
    MIT

  • MCP-Python

    rhabraken
    F
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    A server that enables interaction with PostgreSQL, MySQL, MariaDB, or SQLite databases through Claude Desktop using natural language queries.
    1
    -

  • PlayFab MCP Server

    akiojin
    A
    license
    C
    quality
    A
    maintenance
    A server that enables LLMs (like Claude and VSCode Copilot) to interact with Azure Cosmos DB data through natural language queries, acting as a translator between AI assistants and your database.
    3
    22 npm
    3
    MIT

  • kuzudb-mcp-server

    jordanburke
    A
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    F
    maintenance
    A Model Context Protocol server that provides access to Kuzu databases. This server enables LLMs to inspect database schemas and execute queries on provided kuzu database.
    25 npm
    8
    MIT