Skip to main content
Glama
sbfulfil

PostgreSQL MCP Server

by sbfulfil

list_schemas

Retrieve all database schemas to explore PostgreSQL database structure and understand table relationships.

Instructions

List all schemas in the database

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function for the 'list_schemas' tool. It connects to the PostgreSQL database, queries the information_schema.schemata to list all schemas (excluding system schemas), formats the result as a bulleted list, and returns it in the MCP content format.
    async listSchemas() {
      const client = await this.connectToDatabase();
      
      try {
        const query = `
          SELECT schema_name 
          FROM information_schema.schemata 
          WHERE schema_name NOT IN ('information_schema', 'pg_catalog', 'pg_toast')
          ORDER BY schema_name;
        `;
        
        const result = await client.query(query);
        
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: 'text',
              text: `Available schemas:\n\n` + 
                    result.rows.map(row => `• ${row.schema_name}`).join('\n'),
            },
          ],
        };
      } finally {
        await client.end();
      }
    }
  • Input schema definition for the 'list_schemas' tool, specifying an empty object (no input parameters required).
    inputSchema: {
      type: 'object',
      properties: {},
    },
  • src/index.js:109-116 (registration)
    Tool registration in the ListToolsRequestSchema response, defining the name, description, and input schema for 'list_schemas'.
    {
      name: 'list_schemas',
      description: 'List all schemas in the database',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {},
      },
    },
  • src/index.js:154-155 (registration)
    Dispatcher case in the CallToolRequestSchema handler that routes calls to the listSchemas() method.
    case 'list_schemas':
      return await this.listSchemas();
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action but doesn't describe key behaviors like whether the list is paginated, sorted, or includes metadata; what permissions are required; or if it's a read-only operation. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand how to use it effectively.

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, clear sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse. Every part of the sentence earns its place by conveying essential information without redundancy.

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 simplicity (0 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate. It states what the tool does but lacks details on behavior, usage context, or output format, which could help an agent use it correctly. For a list operation, more context on results would be beneficial.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, so there are no parameters to document. The description doesn't need to add parameter semantics, and it appropriately avoids mentioning any. A baseline of 4 is justified as it doesn't mislead or omit parameter information.

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 ('List') and resource ('all schemas in the database'), making the purpose unambiguous. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_tables' or 'describe_table', which would require mentioning what distinguishes schemas from tables or descriptions.

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 'list_tables' or 'describe_table'. It lacks context about scenarios where listing schemas is appropriate, such as for database exploration or schema management, and doesn't mention any prerequisites or exclusions.

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/sbfulfil/pg-mcp'

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