MCP server for Snowflake database connectivity via ODBC, providing tools for schema introspection, data querying, and routine execution
Server has 14 tools with basic schemas and descriptions, but significant gaps limit production readiness. Most tools have minimal descriptions (10-50 chars, well below the 194-char baseline). Parameter descriptions are sparse or missing entirely. No visible error handling guidance, output schemas, or pagination support. Tools like 'config' and 'instructions' lack actionable descriptions. Critical write tools (execute_nonquery, execute_routine, add_row) have no confirmation/dry-run patterns. Schema completeness varies: some tools show parameter types, but many lack descriptions for what those parameters control. No tool annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint) despite clear risk classifications. Composition is reasonable (14 focused tools), but descriptions do not guide LLM selection or explain when to use similar tools (e.g., execute_reader vs execute_nonquery).
Inserts a new row into a specified table
Configuration tool for the server
Counts the number of rows in a specified table
Executes SQL statements that modify data (INSERT, UPDATE, DELETE, etc.)
Executes one or more SQL-92 SELECT statements and returns results
Executes a stored procedure or function with parameters
Retrieves column information for a specified table
Retrieves foreign key information for a specified table
Minimal tool descriptions (10-50 chars vs. 194-char baseline). Tools like 'config' and 'instructions' lack context for LLM selection. Descriptions do not explain WHEN to use each tool or what it returns.
No parameter descriptions for critical parameters. 'parameters' object in execute_routine and add_row lacks explanation of expected structure, format, or constraints. LLMs cannot infer what 'parameters' should contain.
Write tools (execute_nonquery, execute_routine, add_row) lack confirmation/dry-run patterns and no error guidance. No indication of retryability, idempotency, or recovery steps. Agents cannot safely plan destructive operations.
| Scored | Grade | Overall | Spec posture | Rubric |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-09-23 | F | 46 | 2026-07-28+ | v2 |
Retrieves index information for a specified table
Retrieves primary key information for a specified table
Retrieves stored procedures and functions from the database
Retrieves list of tables from the database schema
Provides instructions for using the MCP server tools
Retrieves the database server version
No tool annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint) despite clear risk classifications (READ_ONLY vs WRITE). Agents cannot infer safety properties from tool definitions alone.
Output schemas not documented. Tools return results but no schema describes fields, types, or pagination. LLMs cannot plan downstream tool calls or extract required IDs for chaining.