Raccoon MCP

Start streaming SQLite query

db_query_start

Read-only

Prepare a SQLite query, return its first batch, and keep the iterator open to fetch subsequent batches.

Instructions

Prepare a SQLite query, return its first batch, and retain the iterator for subsequent batches.

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": {
      "file": "<file>",
      "sql": "<sql>"
    },
    "name": "db_query_start"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`sql`	Yes
`file`	Yes
`params`	No
`deviceId`	No
`readOnly`	No
`batchRows`	No
`deviceName`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.8.0Oct 20, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare the operation as read-only, non-destructive, and closed-world. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond that: it returns only the first batch and retains an iterator for later batches, which is a non-obvious side effect. It still omits iterator cleanup and error behavior, but the added disclosure is strong for a single sentence.

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 one front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every phrase adds information: query preparation, first-batch return, and iterator retention.

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?

With no output schema, 0% schema description coverage, and 7 parameters, the description is insufficient for correct invocation. It covers the core streaming purpose but omits parameter semantics, follow-up batch mechanics, and when to use this versus sibling query tools.

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

Parameters1/5

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

The schema has 0% description coverage across 7 parameters, so the description carries the full burden of explaining parameter meaning. It says nothing about sql, file, params, deviceId, readOnly, batchRows, or deviceName, leaving them documented only by name and type.

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 states a specific verb and resource: prepare a SQLite query, return the first batch, and retain the iterator. This clearly distinguishes it from a simple execute tool and implies a streaming workflow, though it does not explicitly name db_query_next or db_query_close as the follow-up tools.

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 implies usage context by mentioning 'first batch' and 'subsequent batches,' so an agent can infer this is for streaming/paginated queries. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance versus db_execute, db_query_next, or db_query_close.

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

Deploy Server