Centia MCP Server

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

postSchema

Create database schemas with tables, columns, indexes, constraints, and sequences. Define table structure including columns, types, defaults, and constraints.

Instructions

Create schema(s).

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": {
      "requestBody": "<requestBody>"
    },
    "name": "postSchema"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`requestBody`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.9May 26, 2026

TDQS

D1.8/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as safety, idempotency, permissions, or side effects. For a mutation tool, this is a significant gap.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is extremely short (one sentence), but it is under-specified rather than concise. Key information is missing, making it less helpful than a longer, more informative description.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given the complexity of creating schemas with multiple nested objects (tables, columns, indices, etc.), the description provides no context about return values, error handling, or behavior. The lack of output schema and annotation coverage compounds the deficiency.

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 description adds no meaning beyond the input schema, which already has rich property-level descriptions. Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description fails to clarify the parameter structure or usage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Create schema(s)' states the verb and resource, but it is a near-tautology of the tool name 'postSchema' and does not differentiate from siblings like 'postTable' or 'postColumn'. It adds minimal clarifying value beyond the name.

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 tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'patchSchema' for updates or 'deleteSchema' for removal). The description provides no context about prerequisites, limitations, or scenarios.

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