Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@takeokunn/metabase-mcp

@takeokunn/metabase-mcp

by takeokunn
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

get_xray_entity_cell_compare

Retrieve an x-ray dashboard comparing a specific cell of an entity in Metabase with another entity's cell. Provide entity types, IDs, and cell query for comparison.

Instructions

Get a comparison x-ray automagic dashboard for a specific cell of an entity in Metabase

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": {
      "input": "<input>"
    },
    "name": "get_xray_entity_cell_compare"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
inputYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.2.0

TDQS

C2.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Get', implying a read operation, but does not confirm read-only behavior, discuss side effects, or specify any constraints like authentication needs or rate limits.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is a single sentence of 12 words, which is concise. However, it sacrifices completeness and does not use front-loading effectively to convey key information first.

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 nested parameters and many sibling tools, the description is extremely incomplete. It does not explain what a 'cell' is, what the 'automagic dashboard' contains, what the comparison entails, or what the return value looks like.

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 input schema has 5 required sub-properties with zero description coverage. The description does not mention any parameters, leaving the agent to infer from parameter names alone. This fails to add semantic meaning beyond the schema.

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 states it gets a comparison x-ray automagic dashboard for a cell of an entity, which clarifies the tool's purpose. However, terms like 'automagic dashboard' and 'cell' are not defined, and the description does not distinguish from siblings like get_xray_entity_cell or get_xray_entity_compare, leaving ambiguity.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_xray_entity_cell or get_xray_entity_compare. The description does not provide context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools