Ripplecheck MCP Server
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| DATAHUB_GMS_URL | No | The URL of the DataHub GMS server, e.g., http://localhost:8080 | |
| RIPPLECHECK_MODE | No | Mode of operation. Set to 'live' for live DataHub mode, otherwise the offline fixture mode is used. | |
| DATAHUB_GMS_TOKEN | No | Your DataHub personal access token for local DataHub OSS | |
| DATAHUB_MCP_COMMAND | No | Command to launch the official DataHub MCP server, e.g., 'uvx mcp-server-datahub@latest' | |
| TOOLS_IS_MUTATION_ENABLED | No | Set to 'true' to enable mutation tools for writebacks. Clear or set to 'false' for read-only live assessment. |
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": false
} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| assess_schema_changeB | Compile proposed DDL or a column change into a counterfactual DataHub graph, policy proof, release gate, migration DAG, and merge-ready evidence manifest. |
| list_demo_scenariosA | List the built-in offline scenarios and their expected decisions. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 2 tools
The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: assess_schema_change performs a complex analysis, while list_demo_scenarios provides test scenarios. No overlap or ambiguity exists.
Both tools follow the same verb_noun pattern (assess_schema_change, list_demo_scenarios), making the API predictable and easy to navigate.
With only two tools, the server feels minimally scoped. While appropriate for a niche utility, the count is on the thin side, making it harder to justify a standalone server.
The core assessment functionality is present, but the server lacks any management operations (e.g., listing past assessments, retrieving specific results), which limits its coverage of the full workflow.