Skip to main content
Glama
nikhil-ganage

MCP Server Airflow Token

test_connection

Verify connectivity to Airflow deployments by testing connection parameters like host, port, and credentials before configuring workflows.

Instructions

Test a connection

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
conn_typeYes
hostNo
portNo
loginNo
passwordNo
schemaNo
extraNo

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function for the 'test_connection' tool. It constructs a connection request from parameters and calls the Airflow ConnectionApi.test_connection method.
    async def test_connection(
        conn_type: str,
        host: Optional[str] = None,
        port: Optional[int] = None,
        login: Optional[str] = None,
        password: Optional[str] = None,
        schema: Optional[str] = None,
        extra: Optional[str] = None,
    ) -> List[Union[types.TextContent, types.ImageContent, types.EmbeddedResource]]:
        connection_request = {
            "conn_type": conn_type,
        }
        if host is not None:
            connection_request["host"] = host
        if port is not None:
            connection_request["port"] = port
        if login is not None:
            connection_request["login"] = login
        if password is not None:
            connection_request["password"] = password
        if schema is not None:
            connection_request["schema"] = schema
        if extra is not None:
            connection_request["extra"] = extra
    
        response = connection_api.test_connection(connection_request=connection_request)
        return [types.TextContent(type="text", text=str(response.to_dict()))]
  • The get_all_functions in connection.py defines and returns the registration tuple for 'test_connection', which is imported and used in main.py to register the tool.
    def get_all_functions() -> list[tuple[Callable, str, str, bool]]:
        """Return list of (function, name, description, is_read_only) tuples for registration."""
        return [
            (list_connections, "list_connections", "List all connections", True),
            (create_connection, "create_connection", "Create a connection", False),
            (get_connection, "get_connection", "Get a connection by ID", True),
            (update_connection, "update_connection", "Update a connection by ID", False),
            (delete_connection, "delete_connection", "Delete a connection by ID", False),
            (test_connection, "test_connection", "Test a connection", True),
        ]
  • src/main.py:90-92 (registration)
    The generic registration loop in main.py that calls app.add_tool for all functions from modules, including test_connection from connection.py.
    for func, name, description, *_ in functions:
        app.add_tool(func, name=name, description=description)
Behavior1/5

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 but fails completely. 'Test a connection' gives no indication of whether this is a read-only diagnostic operation or has side effects, what authentication is required, what happens during testing, what the output looks like, or any error conditions. For a tool with 7 parameters and no annotation coverage, this is severely inadequate.

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 maximally concise at just three words. While this represents severe under-specification rather than ideal conciseness, from a pure structural perspective, there's no wasted language or unnecessary elaboration. Every word directly relates to the tool's purpose, though that purpose is minimally expressed.

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?

For a tool with 7 parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is completely inadequate. It provides no context about what the tool actually does beyond the name, no parameter guidance, no behavioral information, and no differentiation from sibling tools. This leaves the agent with insufficient information to use the tool correctly.

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 provides zero information about any of the 7 parameters. With 0% schema description coverage (titles only, no descriptions), the description fails to compensate by explaining what conn_type, host, port, login, password, schema, or extra parameters mean, their relationships, or how they're used in testing. This leaves all parameters semantically undefined.

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

Purpose2/5

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

The description 'Test a connection' is a tautology that essentially restates the tool name 'test_connection'. It provides no additional specificity about what kind of connection is being tested, what 'testing' entails, or what resource is involved. While the verb 'test' is clear, the description lacks any meaningful elaboration 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 Guidelines1/5

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

The description provides absolutely no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are multiple sibling tools related to connections (create_connection, delete_connection, get_connection, list_connections, update_connection), but the description offers no differentiation or context about when testing versus creating/getting/updating is appropriate.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/nikhil-ganage/mcp-server-airflow-token'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server