Which integrations are available for this server?

Integrates with Codecov for code coverage reporting and quality metrics. Offers Docker-ready deployment options for running the MCPQL server in containerized environments. Hosted on GitHub with CI/CD workflow integration for automated testing and deployment. Uses Jest for comprehensive testing of all database tools and operations. Runs on Node.js (18+) as the execution environment for the SQL Server MCP server. Available as an npm package for easy installation and dependency management. Built with TypeScript 5.8.3, providing type-safe interactions with SQL Server databases.

1. Click on "Install Server". 2. Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state. 3. In the chat, type @ followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@MCPQL show me the top 10 customers by total purchase amount" That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed. Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.

MCPQL

by hendrickcastro

Overview Schema Related Servers Score Discussions

TypeScript

Hybrid

MCPQL - SQL Server MCP

License: MIT Node.js Version TypeScript npm version Downloads GitHub stars GitHub issues GitHub forks Build Status Coverage Status SQL Server Azure SQL MCP Protocol Claude Desktop Cursor IDE Trae AI Docker Security Maintenance

A comprehensive Model Context Protocol (MCP) server for SQL Server database operations. This server provides 10 powerful tools for database analysis, object discovery, and data manipulation through the MCP protocol.

🚀 Quick Start

Prerequisites

Node.js 18+ and npm
SQL Server database with appropriate connection credentials
MCP-compatible client (like Claude Desktop, Cursor IDE, or any MCP client)

Installation & Configuration

Option 1: Using npx from GitHub (Recommended)

No installation needed! Just configure your MCP client:

For Claude Desktop (claude_desktop_config.json):

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "mcpql": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "hendrickcastro/mcpql"],
      "env": {
        "DB_AUTHENTICATION_TYPE": "sql",
        "DB_SERVER": "your_server",
        "DB_NAME": "your_database",
        "DB_USER": "your_username",
        "DB_PASSWORD": "your_password",
        "DB_PORT": "1433",
        "DB_ENCRYPT": "false",
        "DB_TRUST_SERVER_CERTIFICATE": "true"
      }
    }
  }
}

For Cursor IDE:

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "mcpql": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "hendrickcastro/mcpql"],
      "env": {
        "DB_AUTHENTICATION_TYPE": "sql",
        "DB_SERVER": "your_server",
        "DB_NAME": "your_database",
        "DB_USER": "your_username",
        "DB_PASSWORD": "your_password",
        "DB_PORT": "1433",
        "DB_ENCRYPT": "false",
        "DB_TRUST_SERVER_CERTIFICATE": "true"
      }
    }
  }
}

Option 2: Local Development Installation

Clone and setup:

git clone https://github.com/hendrickcastro/MCPQL.git
cd MCPQL
npm install
npm run build

Configure database connection: Create a .env file with your database credentials:

# Basic SQL Server connection
DB_AUTHENTICATION_TYPE=sql
DB_SERVER=localhost
DB_NAME=MyDatabase
DB_USER=sa
DB_PASSWORD=YourPassword123!
DB_PORT=1433
DB_ENCRYPT=false
DB_TRUST_SERVER_CERTIFICATE=true

Configure MCP client with local path:

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "mcpql": {
      "command": "node",
      "args": ["path/to/MCPQL/dist/server.js"]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP server: MSSQL MCP Server

🛠️ Available Tools

MCPQL provides 11 comprehensive tools for SQL Server database operations:

1. 🏗️ Table Analysis - `mcp_table_analysis`

Complete table structure analysis including columns, keys, indexes, and constraints.

2. 📋 Stored Procedure Analysis - `mcp_sp_structure`

Analyze stored procedure structure including parameters, dependencies, and source code.

3. 👀 Data Preview - `mcp_preview_data`

Preview table data with optional filtering and row limits.

4. 📊 Column Statistics - `mcp_get_column_stats`

Get comprehensive statistics for a specific column.

5. ⚙️ Execute Stored Procedure - `mcp_execute_procedure`

Execute stored procedures with parameters and return results.

6. 🔍 Execute SQL Query - `mcp_execute_query`

Execute custom SQL queries with full error handling.

7. ⚡ Quick Data Analysis - `mcp_quick_data_analysis`

Quick statistical analysis including row count, column distributions, and top values.

8. 🔎 Comprehensive Search - `mcp_search_comprehensive`

Search across database objects by name and definition with configurable criteria.

9. 🔗 Object Dependencies - `mcp_get_dependencies`

Get dependencies for database objects (tables, views, stored procedures, etc.).

10. 🎯 Sample Values - `mcp_get_sample_values`

Get sample values from a specific column in a table.

11. 🔒 Security Status - `mcp_get_security_status`

Get current security configuration and status for database operations.

📋 Usage Examples

Analyzing a Table

// Get complete table structure
const analysis = await mcp_table_analysis({ 
  table_name: "dbo.Users" 
});

// Get quick data overview
const overview = await mcp_quick_data_analysis({ 
  table_name: "dbo.Users",
  sample_size: 500
});

// Preview table data with filters
const data = await mcp_preview_data({
  table_name: "dbo.Users",
  filters: { "Status": "Active", "Department": "IT" },
  limit: 25
});

Finding Database Objects

// Find all objects containing "User"
const objects = await mcp_search_comprehensive({ 
  pattern: "User",
  search_in_names: true,
  search_in_definitions: false
});

// Find procedures that query a specific table
const procedures = await mcp_search_comprehensive({ 
  pattern: "FROM Users",
  object_types: ["PROCEDURE"],
  search_in_definitions: true
});

Analyzing Stored Procedures

// Get complete stored procedure analysis
const spAnalysis = await mcp_sp_structure({ 
  sp_name: "dbo.usp_GetUserData" 
});

// Execute a stored procedure
const result = await mcp_execute_procedure({
  sp_name: "dbo.usp_GetUserById",
  params: { "UserId": 123, "IncludeDetails": true }
});

Data Analysis

// Get column statistics
const stats = await mcp_get_column_stats({
  table_name: "dbo.Users",
  column_name: "Age"
});

// Get sample values from a column
const samples = await mcp_get_sample_values({
  table_name: "dbo.Users",
  column_name: "Department",
  limit: 15
});

🔧 Environment Variables & Connection Types

MCPQL supports multiple SQL Server connection types with comprehensive configuration options:

🔐 Authentication Types

Set DB_AUTHENTICATION_TYPE to one of:

sql - SQL Server Authentication (default)
windows - Windows Authentication
azure-ad - Azure Active Directory Authentication

📋 Complete Environment Variables

Variable	Description	Default	Required For
Basic Connection
`DB_AUTHENTICATION_TYPE`	Authentication type (sql/windows/azure-ad)	sql	All
`DB_SERVER`	SQL Server hostname/IP	-	All
`DB_NAME`	Database name	-	All
`DB_PORT`	SQL Server port	1433	All
`DB_TIMEOUT`	Connection timeout (ms)	30000	All
`DB_REQUEST_TIMEOUT`	Request timeout (ms)	30000	All
SQL Server Authentication
`DB_USER`	SQL Server username	-	SQL Auth
`DB_PASSWORD`	SQL Server password	-	SQL Auth
Windows Authentication
`DB_DOMAIN`	Windows domain	-	Windows Auth
`DB_USER`	Windows username	current user	Windows Auth
`DB_PASSWORD`	Windows password	-	Windows Auth
Azure AD Authentication
`DB_USER`	Azure AD username	-	Azure AD (Password)
`DB_PASSWORD`	Azure AD password	-	Azure AD (Password)
`DB_AZURE_CLIENT_ID`	Azure AD App Client ID	-	Azure AD (Service Principal)
`DB_AZURE_CLIENT_SECRET`	Azure AD App Client Secret	-	Azure AD (Service Principal)
`DB_AZURE_TENANT_ID`	Azure AD Tenant ID	-	Azure AD (Service Principal)
SQL Server Express
`DB_INSTANCE_NAME`	Named instance (e.g., SQLEXPRESS)	-	Express instances
Security Settings
`DB_ENCRYPT`	Enable encryption	false	All
`DB_TRUST_SERVER_CERTIFICATE`	Trust server certificate	false	All
`DB_ENABLE_ARITH_ABORT`	Enable arithmetic abort	true	All
`DB_USE_UTC`	Use UTC for dates	true	All
Connection Pool
`DB_POOL_MAX`	Maximum connections	10	All
`DB_POOL_MIN`	Minimum connections	0	All
`DB_POOL_IDLE_TIMEOUT`	Idle timeout (ms)	30000	All
Advanced Settings
`DB_CANCEL_TIMEOUT`	Cancel timeout (ms)	5000	All
`DB_PACKET_SIZE`	Packet size (bytes)	4096	All
`DB_CONNECTION_STRING`	Complete connection string	-	Alternative to individual settings
Security Controls
`DB_ALLOW_MODIFICATIONS`	Allow DML/DDL operations	false	All
`DB_ALLOW_STORED_PROCEDURES`	Allow stored procedure execution	false	All

🔧 Connection Configuration Examples

1. 🏠 SQL Server Local (SQL Authentication)

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "mcpql": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "hendrickcastro/mcpql"],
      "env": {
        "DB_AUTHENTICATION_TYPE": "sql",
        "DB_SERVER": "localhost",
        "DB_NAME": "MyDatabase",
        "DB_USER": "sa",
        "DB_PASSWORD": "YourPassword123!",
        "DB_PORT": "1433",
        "DB_ENCRYPT": "false",
        "DB_TRUST_SERVER_CERTIFICATE": "true"
      }
    }
  }
}

2. 🏢 SQL Server Express (Named Instance)

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "mcpql": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "hendrickcastro/mcpql"],
      "env": {
        "DB_AUTHENTICATION_TYPE": "sql",
        "DB_SERVER": "localhost",
        "DB_INSTANCE_NAME": "SQLEXPRESS",
        "DB_NAME": "MyDatabase",
        "DB_USER": "sa",
        "DB_PASSWORD": "YourPassword123!",
        "DB_ENCRYPT": "false",
        "DB_TRUST_SERVER_CERTIFICATE": "true"
      }
    }
  }
}

3. 🪟 Windows Authentication

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "mcpql": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "hendrickcastro/mcpql"],
      "env": {
        "DB_AUTHENTICATION_TYPE": "windows",
        "DB_SERVER": "MYSERVER",
        "DB_NAME": "MyDatabase",
        "DB_DOMAIN": "MYDOMAIN",
        "DB_USER": "myuser",
        "DB_PASSWORD": "mypassword",
        "DB_ENCRYPT": "false",
        "DB_TRUST_SERVER_CERTIFICATE": "true"
      }
    }
  }
}

4. ☁️ Azure SQL Database (Azure AD Password)

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "mcpql": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "hendrickcastro/mcpql"],
      "env": {
        "DB_AUTHENTICATION_TYPE": "azure-ad",
        "DB_SERVER": "myserver.database.windows.net",
        "DB_NAME": "MyDatabase",
        "DB_USER": "user@domain.com",
        "DB_PASSWORD": "userpassword",
        "DB_PORT": "1433",
        "DB_ENCRYPT": "true",
        "DB_TRUST_SERVER_CERTIFICATE": "false"
      }
    }
  }
}

5. 🔐 Azure SQL Database (Service Principal)

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "mcpql": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "hendrickcastro/mcpql"],
      "env": {
        "DB_AUTHENTICATION_TYPE": "azure-ad",
        "DB_SERVER": "myserver.database.windows.net",
        "DB_NAME": "MyDatabase",
        "DB_AZURE_CLIENT_ID": "your-client-id",
        "DB_AZURE_CLIENT_SECRET": "your-client-secret",
        "DB_AZURE_TENANT_ID": "your-tenant-id",
        "DB_PORT": "1433",
        "DB_ENCRYPT": "true",
        "DB_TRUST_SERVER_CERTIFICATE": "false"
      }
    }
  }
}

6. 🔗 Using Connection String

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "mcpql": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "hendrickcastro/mcpql"],
      "env": {
        "DB_CONNECTION_STRING": "Server=localhost;Database=MyDatabase;User Id=sa;Password=YourPassword123!;Encrypt=false;TrustServerCertificate=true;"
      }
    }
  }
}

🔒 Security Features

MCPQL includes comprehensive security controls to prevent accidental database modifications, especially important in production environments.

🛡️ Security Controls

Database Modification Protection

DB_ALLOW_MODIFICATIONS: Controls DML/DDL operations (INSERT, UPDATE, DELETE, ALTER, DROP, CREATE)
DB_ALLOW_STORED_PROCEDURES: Controls stored procedure execution
Default: Both variables default to false for maximum security

Security Status Tool

Use mcp_get_security_status to check current security configuration:

const status = await mcp_get_security_status({});

🔧 Enabling Operations

For Development Environment

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "mcpql": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "hendrickcastro/mcpql"],
      "env": {
        "DB_SERVER": "localhost",
        "DB_NAME": "MyDatabase",
        "DB_USER": "sa",
        "DB_PASSWORD": "YourPassword123!",
        "DB_ALLOW_MODIFICATIONS": "true",
        "DB_ALLOW_STORED_PROCEDURES": "true"
      }
    }
  }
}

For Production Environment (Recommended)

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "mcpql": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "hendrickcastro/mcpql"],
      "env": {
        "DB_SERVER": "prod-server",
        "DB_NAME": "ProductionDB",
        "DB_USER": "readonly_user",
        "DB_PASSWORD": "secure_password",
        "DB_ALLOW_MODIFICATIONS": "false",
        "DB_ALLOW_STORED_PROCEDURES": "false"
      }
    }
  }
}

🚨 Security Error Messages

When operations are blocked, MCPQL provides clear guidance:

Error: Modification operations are disabled for security.
To enable modifications, configure: DB_ALLOW_MODIFICATIONS=true

Error: Stored procedure execution is disabled for security.
To enable stored procedures, configure: DB_ALLOW_STORED_PROCEDURES=true

📋 Always Allowed Operations

These operations are always permitted regardless of security settings:

SELECT queries
Table analysis and schema inspection
Column statistics and data preview
Object search and dependency analysis
Database metadata operations

For complete security documentation, see SECURITY.md.

🚨 Troubleshooting Common Issues

Connection Issues

"Login failed": Check username/password. For Windows auth, ensure DB_AUTHENTICATION_TYPE=windows
"Server was not found": Verify server name and port. For SQL Express, add DB_INSTANCE_NAME
"Certificate" errors: For local development, set DB_TRUST_SERVER_CERTIFICATE=true
Timeout errors: Increase DB_TIMEOUT or check network connectivity

SQL Server Express Setup

Enable TCP/IP protocol in SQL Server Configuration Manager
Set a static port (usually 1433) or use dynamic port with Browser Service
Configure Windows Firewall to allow SQL Server traffic
Use DB_INSTANCE_NAME=SQLEXPRESS for default Express installations

Azure SQL Database Setup

Create server firewall rules to allow client IP
Use format: server.database.windows.net for server name
Always set DB_ENCRYPT=true and DB_TRUST_SERVER_CERTIFICATE=false
For Service Principal auth, register app in Azure AD and assign permissions

🧪 Testing

Run the comprehensive test suite:

npm test

The test suite includes comprehensive testing of all 10 tools with real database testing and complete coverage.

🏗️ Architecture

Project Structure

MCPQL/
├── src/
│   ├── __tests__/          # Comprehensive test suite
│   ├── tools/              # Modular tool implementations
│   │   ├── tableAnalysis.ts      # Table analysis tools
│   │   ├── storedProcedureAnalysis.ts  # SP analysis tools
│   │   ├── dataOperations.ts     # Data operation tools
│   │   ├── objectSearch.ts       # Search and discovery tools
│   │   ├── types.ts              # Type definitions
│   │   └── index.ts              # Tool exports
│   ├── db.ts               # Database connection management
│   ├── server.ts           # MCP server setup and handlers
│   ├── tools.ts            # Tool definitions and schemas
│   └── mcp-server.ts       # Tool re-exports
├── dist/                   # Compiled JavaScript output
└── package.json           # Dependencies and scripts

Key Features

⚡ Connection Pooling: Efficient database connection management
🛡️ Robust Error Handling: Comprehensive error handling and validation
📋 Rich Metadata: Detailed results with comprehensive database information
🔧 Flexible Configuration: Environment-based configuration
📊 Optimized Queries: Efficient SQL queries for all operations

📝 Important Notes

Object Names: Always use schema-qualified names (e.g., dbo.Users, api.Idiomas)
Error Handling: All tools return structured responses with success/error indicators
Type Safety: Full TypeScript support with proper type definitions
Connection Management: Automatic connection pooling and retry logic
Security: Parameterized queries to prevent SQL injection

🤝 Contributing

Fork the repository
Create a feature branch (git checkout -b feature/amazing-feature)
Make your changes and add tests
Ensure all tests pass (npm test)
Commit your changes (git commit -m 'Add amazing feature')
Push to the branch (git push origin feature/amazing-feature)
Open a Pull Request

📄 License

This project is licensed under the MIT License - see the LICENSE file for details.

🙏 Acknowledgments

Built with the Model Context Protocol SDK
Uses mssql for SQL Server connectivity
Comprehensive testing with Jest

🏷️ Tags & Keywords

Database: sql-server azure-sql database-analysis database-tools mssql t-sql database-management database-administration database-operations data-analysis

MCP & AI: model-context-protocol mcp-server mcp-tools ai-tools claude-desktop cursor-ide anthropic llm-integration ai-database intelligent-database

Technology: typescript nodejs npm-package cli-tool database-client sql-client database-sdk rest-api json-api database-connector

Features: table-analysis stored-procedures data-preview column-statistics query-execution database-search object-dependencies schema-analysis data-exploration database-insights

Deployment: docker azure-deployment cloud-ready enterprise-ready production-ready scalable secure authenticated encrypted configurable

Use Cases: database-development data-science business-intelligence database-migration schema-documentation performance-analysis data-governance database-monitoring troubleshooting automation

🎯 MCPQL provides comprehensive SQL Server database analysis and manipulation capabilities through the Model Context Protocol. Perfect for database administrators, developers, and anyone working with SQL Server databases! 🚀

Available Tools

11 tools

mcp_execute_procedureC

Execute a SQL Server stored procedure with parameters and return results

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`sp_name`	Yes	Fully qualified stored procedure name (schema.name), e.g. "api.usp_BusquedaByIdUnico_v2"
`params`	No	Parameters to pass to the stored procedure as key-value pairs

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool executes stored procedures and returns results, but lacks details on permissions required, transaction handling, error behavior, or output format. This is a significant gap for a tool that performs database operations.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core functionality without unnecessary words. It directly communicates the tool's purpose and scope, making it easy to understand at a glance.

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 the complexity of executing stored procedures in SQL Server, the description is insufficient. With no annotations, no output schema, and incomplete behavioral details, it fails to address critical aspects like security requirements, result formatting, or error handling, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent to use it effectively.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents both parameters. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by mentioning 'parameters and return results,' but doesn't provide additional context on parameter formatting, validation, or result structure. Baseline 3 is appropriate given the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 clearly states the action ('Execute') and resource ('SQL Server stored procedure'), specifying it handles parameters and returns results. It distinguishes from generic query execution tools but doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling 'mcp_execute_query' beyond the stored procedure focus.

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 like 'mcp_execute_query' for direct SQL queries or 'mcp_sp_structure' for examining stored procedures. The description implies usage for stored procedures but offers no context on prerequisites, limitations, or comparative use cases.

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

mcp_execute_queryC

Execute a raw SQL query and return the results

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`query`	Yes	The SQL query to execute. IMPORTANT: When referencing objects, use bracketed, schema-qualified names (e.g., SELECT * FROM [dbo].[Users]).

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions executing a query and returning results but fails to address critical aspects like whether this is a read-only or write operation, potential risks (e.g., data modification, performance impact), authentication needs, or error handling. For a SQL execution tool, this omission is significant.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is extremely concise and front-loaded, consisting of a single sentence that directly states the tool's purpose. Every word earns its place, with no redundant or unnecessary information, making it highly efficient for quick comprehension.

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 the complexity of executing raw SQL queries (which can involve reads, writes, or schema changes) and the absence of both annotations and an output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not cover behavioral traits, return formats, error conditions, or safety considerations, leaving the agent with insufficient context for reliable tool invocation.

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 description does not add any parameter-specific information beyond what the input schema provides. Since schema description coverage is 100% (the 'query' parameter is fully documented in the schema), the baseline score of 3 is appropriate. The description neither compensates for gaps nor enhances understanding of the parameter's semantics.

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 clearly states the action ('Execute a raw SQL query') and outcome ('return the results'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate this tool from its sibling 'mcp_execute_procedure', which might also execute database operations, leaving some ambiguity about when to choose one over the other.

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 like 'mcp_execute_procedure' or other siblings such as 'mcp_preview_data' or 'mcp_quick_data_analysis'. It lacks context about appropriate use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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

mcp_get_column_statsC

Get comprehensive statistics for a specific column in a table

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`table_name`	Yes	Fully qualified table name (schema.table), e.g. "api.Idiomas"
`column_name`	Yes	Name of the column to analyze

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'Get comprehensive statistics' implies a read-only operation, it doesn't specify whether this requires special permissions, what 'comprehensive' entails (e.g., statistical measures included), performance characteristics, or potential limitations like row count restrictions. The description provides minimal behavioral context beyond the basic operation.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is a single, efficient sentence that gets straight to the point without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a tool with two parameters and clear purpose, though it could potentially benefit from slightly more context given the lack of annotations and sibling tool differentiation.

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?

For a statistical analysis tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain what 'comprehensive statistics' includes (mean, median, distribution, null counts, etc.), doesn't mention performance considerations for large tables, and provides no guidance on how this tool fits within the broader analytical toolkit represented by sibling tools.

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 description doesn't add any parameter information beyond what's already in the schema, which has 100% coverage with clear descriptions for both parameters. The baseline score of 3 is appropriate since the schema fully documents the parameters, and the description doesn't need to compensate for any gaps.

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 clearly states the action ('Get comprehensive statistics') and target ('for a specific column in a table'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like mcp_table_analysis or mcp_quick_data_analysis, which might offer overlapping functionality.

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. With siblings like mcp_table_analysis, mcp_quick_data_analysis, and mcp_preview_data that might offer related analytical functions, there's no indication of when this column-specific statistics tool is preferred or what distinguishes it from broader analysis tools.

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

mcp_get_dependenciesC

Get dependencies for a database object (tables, views, stored procedures, etc.)

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`object_name`	Yes	Fully qualified object name (schema.name), e.g. "api.Idiomas"

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

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 states the action ('Get dependencies') but lacks behavioral details such as permissions required, format of returned dependencies (e.g., list, graph), error handling, or rate limits. This is a significant gap for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the purpose without unnecessary details. It could be slightly improved by adding brief context, but it earns its place by being direct and clear.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what 'dependencies' entail (e.g., foreign keys, references), the return format, or error cases. For a tool with one parameter but rich potential output complexity, more context is needed to guide the agent effectively.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with the parameter 'object_name' fully documented in the schema. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by implying the parameter is for a database object, but does not provide additional syntax, examples, or constraints. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema handles the heavy lifting.

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 clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource ('dependencies for a database object'), specifying the types of objects (tables, views, stored procedures, etc.). It distinguishes from siblings like mcp_execute_query or mcp_preview_data by focusing on dependency retrieval, but does not explicitly differentiate from all siblings (e.g., mcp_sp_structure might be related).

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. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an existing object), exclusions, or compare to siblings like mcp_sp_structure or mcp_search_comprehensive, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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

mcp_get_sample_valuesC

Get sample values from a specific column in a table

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`table_name`	Yes	Fully qualified table name (schema.table), e.g. "dbo.Users"
`column_name`	Yes	Name of the column to get sample values from
`limit`	No	Maximum number of distinct values to return

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool 'gets sample values' but doesn't clarify whether this is a read-only operation, if it requires specific permissions, how it handles large datasets, or what the return format looks like. This leaves significant gaps for a tool that interacts with database tables.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to understand at a glance.

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 the complexity of database operations and the lack of both annotations and an output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't address behavioral aspects like safety, permissions, or return format, leaving the agent with incomplete context for proper tool invocation.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the input schema already fully documents all three parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what's in the schema—it doesn't explain relationships between parameters or provide usage examples. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 clearly states the action ('Get sample values') and target ('from a specific column in a table'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes this from siblings like mcp_get_column_stats (statistics) and mcp_preview_data (full data preview), though it doesn't explicitly name these alternatives.

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 like mcp_get_column_stats or mcp_preview_data. The description implies usage for sampling column values but offers no context about prerequisites, typical scenarios, or exclusions.

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

mcp_get_security_statusB

Get current security configuration and status for database operations

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No parameters

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

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 of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool retrieves security configuration and status, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't specify whether it requires special permissions, what format the output is in, or if there are rate limits. This leaves significant gaps for a security-related tool.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, clear sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded and wastes no space, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (security-related with no output schema) and lack of annotations, the description is minimally adequate but incomplete. It states what the tool does but doesn't cover behavioral aspects like output format or permissions needed, which are crucial for security operations. Without an output schema, more detail on return values would be helpful.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description doesn't add parameter details, but since there are no parameters, this is acceptable. Baseline is 4 for 0 parameters, as the schema fully covers the absence of inputs.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('current security configuration and status for database operations'), making it easy to understand what it does. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'mcp_get_dependencies' or 'mcp_get_column_stats', which also retrieve metadata but for different aspects.

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, context for security checks, or comparisons to sibling tools like 'mcp_execute_query' or 'mcp_table_analysis', leaving the agent to infer usage based on the name alone.

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

mcp_preview_dataC

Get a preview of data from a SQL Server table with optional filters

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`table_name`	Yes	Fully qualified table name (schema.table), e.g. "dbo.Users"
`filters`	No	Optional filters as column-value pairs, e.g. {"Status": "Active"}
`limit`	No	Maximum number of rows to return

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states it 'gets a preview' without disclosing behavioral traits like whether it's read-only, potential performance impacts, authentication needs, or rate limits. It lacks details on what 'preview' entails (e.g., sample rows, limited columns) beyond the schema's limit parameter.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Get a preview of data') and adds key detail ('with optional filters'). There's no wasted wording, making it appropriately sized and easy to parse.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete for a tool with 3 parameters and potential complexity. It doesn't explain return values, error handling, or how 'preview' differs from full queries, leaving gaps in understanding the tool's behavior and output.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents parameters like 'table_name' and 'filters'. The description adds minimal value by mentioning 'optional filters' but doesn't elaborate on semantics beyond what the schema provides, such as filter syntax examples or preview-specific constraints.

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 clearly states the action ('Get a preview') and resource ('data from a SQL Server table'), specifying it's for previewing with optional filters. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'mcp_get_sample_values' or 'mcp_quick_data_analysis', which might offer similar data retrieval functions.

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 mentions 'optional filters' but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'mcp_execute_query' for more complex queries or 'mcp_get_sample_values' for sampling. There's no explicit when/when-not usage context or sibling differentiation.

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

mcp_quick_data_analysisB

Quick statistical analysis of a table including row count, column distributions, and top values

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`table_name`	Yes	Fully qualified table name (schema.table), e.g. "dbo.Users" or "sales.OrderItems"
`sample_size`	No	Sample size for statistics calculation

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'quick' analysis and sample-based statistics, which hints at performance characteristics, but doesn't clarify critical aspects like whether this is a read-only operation, potential impact on database performance, error handling, or output format. For a statistical analysis tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its behavior.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Quick statistical analysis of a table') and lists key outputs. There's no wasted verbiage or redundancy, making it highly concise and well-structured for quick comprehension.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the tool's moderate complexity (statistical analysis with sampling), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the what (analysis types) but misses the how (behavioral traits) and why (usage context). It doesn't explain return values or error conditions, leaving the agent to infer from the tool name and parameters alone.

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 description doesn't explicitly mention parameters, but it implies the need for a table name through context ('analysis of a table'). The input schema has 100% description coverage, with clear documentation for both 'table_name' and 'sample_size'. Since the schema does the heavy lifting, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate, as the description adds minimal value beyond what's already in the structured schema.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Quick statistical analysis of a table including row count, column distributions, and top values.' It specifies the verb ('analysis') and resource ('table'), and lists specific statistical outputs. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'mcp_get_column_stats' or 'mcp_table_analysis', which likely offer similar functionality.

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. With multiple sibling tools that appear related (e.g., 'mcp_get_column_stats', 'mcp_table_analysis', 'mcp_preview_data'), there's no indication of what makes this 'quick' analysis distinct or when it's preferred over other options. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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

mcp_search_comprehensiveC

Search across database objects by name and definition with configurable criteria

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`pattern`	Yes	Search pattern or text to find
`object_types`	No	Types of objects to search in
`search_in_names`	No	Whether to search in object names
`search_in_definitions`	No	Whether to search in object definitions/source code

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'search across database objects' but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as performance implications, result limits, pagination, authentication requirements, or error handling. For a search tool with no annotation coverage, this leaves critical operational context unspecified.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('search across database objects') and adds qualifying details without waste. Every word earns its place, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete for a search tool with 4 parameters. It lacks details on result format, error cases, or behavioral constraints, which are crucial for effective tool use. The high schema coverage helps, but overall context remains insufficient.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all parameters. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by hinting at 'configurable criteria' and 'by name and definition', which aligns with the schema's parameters but doesn't provide additional syntax or usage details. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 clearly states the verb ('search') and resource ('database objects'), specifying scope ('by name and definition with configurable criteria'). It distinguishes from siblings like mcp_execute_procedure or mcp_preview_data by focusing on search functionality, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from potential search-related siblings not listed.

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 alternatives is provided. The description mentions 'configurable criteria' but doesn't specify scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions. Given siblings like mcp_quick_data_analysis or mcp_table_analysis that might overlap in use cases, this lack of guidance is a significant gap.

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

mcp_sp_structureC

Analyze SQL Server stored procedure structure including parameters, dependencies, and source code

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`sp_name`	Yes	Fully qualified stored procedure name (schema.name), e.g. "eco.usp_Insert_EconomicMovement_v2"

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but lacks behavioral details. It doesn't disclose whether this is a read-only operation, if it requires specific permissions, potential performance impact, or what the output format looks like (e.g., structured data vs raw text). The description only states what is analyzed, not how it behaves.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose. Every word contributes meaning without redundancy. However, it could be slightly more structured by separating analysis aspects with commas or bullets for better readability.

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?

For a tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the analysis returns (e.g., a report, structured data, or raw code), nor does it cover behavioral aspects like error conditions or limitations. Given the complexity of analyzing stored procedures, more context is 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 schema description coverage is 100%, with the single parameter 'sp_name' fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond implying it analyzes the given stored procedure. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 clearly states the verb 'analyze' and the resource 'SQL Server stored procedure structure', specifying what aspects are analyzed (parameters, dependencies, source code). It distinguishes from obvious siblings like mcp_execute_procedure (which runs procedures) and mcp_get_dependencies (which focuses only on dependencies), though not all sibling distinctions are explicit.

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 when to choose this over mcp_get_dependencies for dependency analysis, mcp_table_analysis for broader analysis, or mcp_search_comprehensive for discovery. No prerequisites or exclusions are stated.

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

mcp_table_analysisC

Comprehensive SQL Server table analysis including structure, columns, keys, indexes, and constraints

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`table_name`	Yes	Fully qualified table name (schema.table), e.g. "dbo.Users" or "api.Idiomas"

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

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 of behavioral disclosure. While it mentions 'comprehensive analysis' and lists components, it doesn't describe what the analysis actually returns, whether it's a read-only operation, performance characteristics, or any limitations. For a tool with no annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral questions unanswered.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is a single, efficient sentence that packs substantial information about what the tool analyzes. It's appropriately sized for a single-parameter tool and front-loads the key information about being a comprehensive SQL Server table analysis.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a table analysis tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description provides adequate but incomplete context. It lists what components are analyzed but doesn't describe the return format, depth of analysis, or how results are structured. Given the complexity implied by 'comprehensive' analysis and lack of structured output documentation, there are significant gaps in completeness.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% with the single parameter 'table_name' well-documented in the schema. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what the schema provides. With high schema coverage and only one parameter, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose as 'Comprehensive SQL Server table analysis including structure, columns, keys, indexes, and constraints' - it specifies the verb ('analysis') and resource ('SQL Server table') with specific components analyzed. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like mcp_get_column_stats or mcp_sp_structure, which appear related to table analysis.

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. With multiple sibling tools that appear related to table analysis (mcp_get_column_stats, mcp_get_dependencies, mcp_sp_structure), there's no indication of when this comprehensive analysis is preferred over more specific tools or what distinguishes its scope from them.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

11 tool updatesAug 15, 2025
- First observedmcp_execute_procedure
- First observedmcp_execute_query
- First observedmcp_get_column_stats
- First observedmcp_get_dependencies
- First observedmcp_get_sample_values
- First observedmcp_get_security_status
- First observedmcp_preview_data
- First observedmcp_quick_data_analysis
- First observedmcp_search_comprehensive
- First observedmcp_sp_structure
- First observedmcp_table_analysis

Install Server

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have distinct purposes, but some overlap exists: mcp_quick_data_analysis and mcp_table_analysis both analyze tables, which could cause confusion. However, mcp_quick_data_analysis focuses on statistical analysis while mcp_table_analysis covers structure, so descriptions help differentiate them. Other tools like mcp_execute_procedure and mcp_execute_query are clearly distinct.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent mcp_verb_noun naming pattern with snake_case throughout. The verbs are descriptive (e.g., execute, get, preview, search, analyze), and the nouns clearly indicate the target (e.g., procedure, query, column_stats, dependencies). This uniformity makes the tool set predictable and easy to navigate.

Tool Count5/5

With 11 tools, the count is well-scoped for a SQL Server database management server. Each tool serves a specific function, from executing queries and procedures to analyzing data and structures, without feeling bloated or sparse. This number allows comprehensive coverage of common database tasks without overwhelming users.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers a wide range of SQL Server operations, including query execution, data analysis, structure inspection, and security checks. Minor gaps exist, such as lacking tools for database creation, backup, or user management, but these are not core to the analysis and execution focus. Agents can handle most database interaction workflows effectively with this surface.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive

ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Need Help?

Related Servers

Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.

Looking for Admin?

If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.

Related MCP Connectors

dataOAuth
co.thinair
Read-only PostgreSQL, MySQL, SQL Server access via MCP — 24 dialect-aware hosted tools.
Databases Developer Tools
2
Google Big Query A
com.googleapis.bigquery
The BigQuery remote MCP server is a fully managed service that uses the Model Context Protocol to connect AI applications and LLMs to BigQuery data sources. It provides secure, standardized tools for AI agents to list datasets and tables, retrieve schemas, generate and execute SQL queries through natural language, and analyze data—enabling direct access to enterprise analytics data without requiring manual SQL coding.
Databases Cloud Platforms Search
63
hithereiamaliff-mcp-nextcloudOAuth
ai.smithery
A comprehensive Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that enables AI assistants to interact with yo…
Cloud Storage File Systems Workplace & Productivity
237
SRI — MCP Server Inspector A
biz.sri-test
2,000+ MCP servers read at source level. Know what one does before you connect. Free, no key.
Developer Tools
21

Related MCP Servers

Database MCP Server
Databases Developer Tools
georgi-terziyski
F
license
Not graded
quality
D
maintenance
A Model Context Protocol server that provides tools for connecting to and interacting with various database systems (SQLite, PostgreSQL, MySQL/MariaDB, SQL Server) through a unified interface.
Updated a year ago (2025-03-18 13:32 UTC)
3
-
MSSQL MCP Server
Databases Developer Tools
knight0zh
A
license
B
quality
D
maintenance
A Model Context Protocol server that enables executing SQL queries and managing connections with Microsoft SQL Server databases.
Updated a year ago (2025-03-10 01:46 UTC)
1
3,338
6
MIT
MSSQL MCP Server
Databases RAG Systems
jensenloke
F
license
Not graded
quality
D
maintenance
A Model Context Protocol server that provides comprehensive access to Microsoft SQL Server databases, enabling Language Models to inspect schemas, execute queries, manage database objects, and perform advanced database operations.
Updated a year ago (2025-06-11 03:32 UTC)
8
-
sql-mcp
Databases Developer Tools
NakiriYuuzu
A
license
Not graded
quality
C
maintenance
A Model Context Protocol server for interacting with MSSQL and PostgreSQL databases, offering tools for schema exploration and SQL execution. It features configurable query modes for safety and supports advanced authentication methods like Windows Auth and SSL.
Updated 4 months ago (2026-04-23 00:25 UTC)
17
MIT

Appeared in Searches

Giving Claude full access to SQL Server for free

Latest Blog Posts

Who's Calling? MCP Hosts Are an Identity Blind Spot (And the Spec Knows It)
By Om-Shree-0709 on July 25, 2026.
mcp
Agent Identity
OAuth 2.1
Your AI Chatbot Just Exposed Your CEO's Salary to an Intern
By Om-Shree-0709 on July 2, 2026.
Agent Identity
MCP Security
OAuth Delegation
Why MCP Servers Need Execution Sandboxing (And Why Your Current Stack Isn't Enough)
By Om-Shree-0709 on June 30, 2026.
Agentic Ai
Prompt Injection
WebAssembly

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/hendrickcastro/MCPQL'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server

MCPQL - SQL Server MCP

🚀 Quick Start

Prerequisites

Installation & Configuration

Option 1: Using npx from GitHub (Recommended)

Option 2: Local Development Installation

🛠️ Available Tools

1. 🏗️ Table Analysis - mcp_table_analysis

2. 📋 Stored Procedure Analysis - mcp_sp_structure

3. 👀 Data Preview - mcp_preview_data

4. 📊 Column Statistics - mcp_get_column_stats

5. ⚙️ Execute Stored Procedure - mcp_execute_procedure

6. 🔍 Execute SQL Query - mcp_execute_query

7. ⚡ Quick Data Analysis - mcp_quick_data_analysis

8. 🔎 Comprehensive Search - mcp_search_comprehensive

9. 🔗 Object Dependencies - mcp_get_dependencies

10. 🎯 Sample Values - mcp_get_sample_values

11. 🔒 Security Status - mcp_get_security_status

📋 Usage Examples

Analyzing a Table

Finding Database Objects

Analyzing Stored Procedures

Data Analysis

🔧 Environment Variables & Connection Types

🔐 Authentication Types

📋 Complete Environment Variables

🔧 Connection Configuration Examples

1. 🏠 SQL Server Local (SQL Authentication)

2. 🏢 SQL Server Express (Named Instance)

3. 🪟 Windows Authentication

4. ☁️ Azure SQL Database (Azure AD Password)

5. 🔐 Azure SQL Database (Service Principal)

6. 🔗 Using Connection String

🔒 Security Features

🛡️ Security Controls

Database Modification Protection

Security Status Tool

🔧 Enabling Operations

For Development Environment

For Production Environment (Recommended)

🚨 Security Error Messages

📋 Always Allowed Operations

🚨 Troubleshooting Common Issues

Connection Issues

SQL Server Express Setup

Azure SQL Database Setup

🧪 Testing

🏗️ Architecture

Project Structure

Key Features

📝 Important Notes

🤝 Contributing

📄 License

🙏 Acknowledgments

🏷️ Tags & Keywords

Available Tools

Tool Schema Changelog

Maintenance

Resources

Looking for Admin?

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

Appeared in Searches

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

1. 🏗️ Table Analysis - `mcp_table_analysis`

2. 📋 Stored Procedure Analysis - `mcp_sp_structure`

3. 👀 Data Preview - `mcp_preview_data`

4. 📊 Column Statistics - `mcp_get_column_stats`

5. ⚙️ Execute Stored Procedure - `mcp_execute_procedure`

6. 🔍 Execute SQL Query - `mcp_execute_query`

7. ⚡ Quick Data Analysis - `mcp_quick_data_analysis`

8. 🔎 Comprehensive Search - `mcp_search_comprehensive`

9. 🔗 Object Dependencies - `mcp_get_dependencies`

10. 🎯 Sample Values - `mcp_get_sample_values`

11. 🔒 Security Status - `mcp_get_security_status`