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

@takeokunn/metabase-mcp

by takeokunn
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

get_xray_entity_rule_compare

Compares two Metabase entities with a rule to generate an x-ray dashboard using a specified template.

Instructions

Get a comparison x-ray automagic dashboard for an entity with a rule applied 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_rule_compare"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
inputYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.2.0

TDQS

C2.4/5.0
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. It only states 'Get' without confirming read-only behavior, side effects, authorization needs, or error handling.

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, but it uses jargon ('automagic dashboard') that may be unclear. It is short but not effectively informative.

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 high complexity (nested input, many siblings, no output schema), the description is severely lacking. It fails to explain the comparison, rule application, output format, or how it differs from other X-ray tools.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain any of the six required parameters (entity, prefix, dashboard_template, etc.). The parameter names are ambiguous without elaboration.

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?

Description clearly indicates it gets a comparison x-ray dashboard for an entity with a rule, but does not differentiate from similar siblings like get_xray_entity_compare or get_xray_entity_cell_rule_compare.

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 the many other X-ray tools. No examples or prerequisites are given, leaving the agent without context for selection.

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