Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MongoDB MCP

MongoDB MCP

by vishnuweb-a
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

insert_document

Insert a new document into a specified MongoDB collection by providing the collection name and document data.

Instructions

Insert a document.

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": {
      "collection_name": "<collection_name>",
      "document": "<document>"
    },
    "name": "insert_document"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
documentYes
collection_nameYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.3/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only says 'Insert a document' and reveals nothing about return values, error handling, auto-generated IDs, or whether it overwrites existing documents. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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 extremely concise with no wasted words, but it is under-specified. It is a single sentence that states the action, yet it doesn't earn its place by adding value beyond the name. It is not verbose, but lacks substance.

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 that this is a CRUD tool with two required parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is highly inadequate. It doesn't explain the collection context, document structure, behavior, or any edge cases. It is far from complete for an agent to use correctly.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, but it does not mention the parameters at all. The parameter names 'collection_name' and 'document' are somewhat self-explanatory, but no additional meaning or format details are provided, leaving room for misuse.

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 'Insert a document' clearly identifies a specific verb and resource, making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like update_document or delete_document, though the verb itself provides distinction. It is not misleading but could be more specific about inserting into a collection.

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. It doesn't mention prerequisites, when to use insert vs. update, or any conditions. The user must infer usage from the name alone.

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