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

@takeokunn/metabase-mcp

by takeokunn
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

get_xray_model_index

Retrieves an x-ray automagic dashboard for a model index using its primary key in Metabase.

Instructions

Get an x-ray automagic dashboard for a model index by primary key 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_model_index"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
inputYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.2.0

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It uses the vague term 'automagic dashboard' without explanation, and does not describe side effects, permissions, or output format. This leaves significant ambiguity for an AI agent.

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, which is concise, but the term 'automagic' is unclear and could be replaced with more standard phrasing. It is front-loaded with the verb but the jargon reduces clarity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given there is no output schema and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what an 'automagic dashboard' is, what the response contains, or any limitations. For a tool that retrieves a dashboard, more contextual details are needed.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema provides descriptions for both inner parameters (model_index_id and pk_id), so the description adds little beyond noting 'by primary key'. The 'input' wrapper parameter lacks a description, but overall schema coverage is sufficient. Score is at baseline as the description does not detract nor significantly enhance.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states the action ('Get'), the resource ('x-ray automagic dashboard for a model index'), and the method ('by primary key'). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like get_model_index, which likely retrieves the model index itself rather than a dashboard.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_xray_entity or get_xray_database_candidates. The description does not mention 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