| Ecosystem | 0 | 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| Capabilities | 7 decomposed | 7 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Connects to PostgreSQL databases via native libpq protocol or TCP sockets to extract and expose complete schema metadata including tables, columns, indexes, constraints, and relationships. Uses information_schema queries to build a queryable representation of database structure without requiring ORM abstractions, enabling direct schema inspection for code generation or documentation purposes.
Unique: Implements MCP protocol binding for PostgreSQL schema access, allowing LLM agents to directly query database structure through standardized tool-calling interface rather than requiring custom REST APIs or database client libraries
vs alternatives: Provides schema introspection as an MCP tool callable by Claude, enabling AI agents to autonomously explore and reason about database structure without developer-written query wrappers
Connects to MySQL/MariaDB databases via TCP protocol to extract schema metadata including tables, columns, indexes, foreign keys, and constraints using INFORMATION_SCHEMA queries. Exposes database structure through MCP tool interface, enabling programmatic discovery of table relationships and column definitions without ORM dependencies.
Unique: Provides MySQL schema introspection as an MCP tool, allowing Claude and other LLM agents to autonomously query database structure through standardized tool-calling without custom API wrappers
vs alternatives: Simpler integration than building custom REST endpoints for schema discovery; leverages MCP protocol for direct agent access to MySQL metadata
Connects to Google Cloud Firestore using service account credentials to enumerate collections, sample documents, and infer document schema structure. Uses Firestore SDK to traverse collection hierarchies and analyze document fields, enabling runtime discovery of data structure without requiring pre-defined schemas or manual documentation.
Unique: Implements MCP tool binding for Firestore schema discovery, enabling LLM agents to explore NoSQL document structure through standardized interface without requiring custom Firebase client code
vs alternatives: Provides Firestore schema introspection as an MCP tool callable by Claude, allowing agents to autonomously discover collection and document structure without developer-written Firestore client wrappers
Manages connection lifecycle and routing across PostgreSQL, MySQL, and Firestore databases through a unified MCP tool interface. Handles credential storage, connection pooling, and request routing to appropriate database driver based on connection type, abstracting database-specific protocol details behind a common tool-calling surface.
Unique: Provides unified MCP tool interface for managing connections to heterogeneous databases (SQL and NoSQL), abstracting protocol differences and enabling single agent to query multiple database types
vs alternatives: Simpler than building separate MCP tools for each database type; unified routing layer reduces agent configuration complexity
Executes arbitrary SQL queries against PostgreSQL and MySQL databases through MCP tool interface, returning results as structured JSON with column metadata. Implements query result streaming for large result sets, handling pagination and memory-efficient result buffering to prevent agent context overflow.
Unique: Exposes SQL query execution as an MCP tool with result streaming, enabling LLM agents to execute dynamic queries while managing memory through pagination rather than loading entire result sets into context
vs alternatives: Safer than giving agents direct database access; MCP tool interface provides audit trail and allows for query validation/filtering before execution
Executes Firestore queries against collections using field-based filtering, ordering, and pagination through MCP tool interface. Translates filter conditions into Firestore SDK query API calls, returning documents as JSON with automatic type inference. Supports compound filters and ordering without requiring agents to understand Firestore query syntax.
Unique: Provides Firestore querying as an MCP tool with automatic filter translation, enabling agents to query NoSQL documents without understanding Firestore SDK syntax or composite index requirements
vs alternatives: Abstracts Firestore query complexity; agents can express queries in natural filter conditions rather than learning Firestore SDK API
Caches schema metadata from PostgreSQL, MySQL, and Firestore in memory with configurable TTL and manual invalidation triggers. Reduces repeated schema queries to databases, improving agent response latency for repeated schema introspection. Implements cache invalidation hooks for schema change detection or explicit refresh requests.
Unique: Implements configurable in-memory schema caching with TTL and manual invalidation, reducing repeated database queries for schema introspection in agent loops
vs alternatives: Faster than repeated schema queries for agents with frequent schema references; simpler than external cache systems but limited to single-process deployments
Enables evaluation of AI systems' ability to perform chained mathematical operations (addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, comparisons) across both structured tables and unstructured text extracted from SEC filings. The dataset provides ground-truth question-answer pairs where answers require synthesizing data from multiple locations within earnings reports and applying sequential arithmetic operations, testing whether models can decompose complex financial queries into discrete computational steps.
Unique: Combines real SEC filing documents (not synthetic) with crowdsourced questions requiring multi-step arithmetic, creating a hybrid dataset that tests both domain knowledge extraction and quantitative reasoning in a single evaluation task. Unlike generic math word problems, answers require locating figures within 10+ page documents first.
vs alternatives: More challenging than DROP or SVAMP because it requires financial domain knowledge AND document retrieval before arithmetic, whereas generic math benchmarks assume figures are already extracted
Assesses whether AI systems understand financial terminology, accounting concepts, and domain-specific metrics by requiring them to answer questions about real earnings reports from S&P 500 companies. The dataset tests recognition of financial line items (revenue, COGS, operating expenses, net income), ability to distinguish between different financial statements (income statement vs balance sheet), and understanding of financial ratios and metrics without explicit instruction on their definitions.
Unique: Uses authentic SEC filings rather than synthetic financial data, exposing models to real-world accounting variations, footnote complexity, and the actual structure of professional financial documents. This tests transfer learning from general text to specialized domain without domain-specific pretraining.
vs alternatives: More authentic than synthetic financial QA datasets because it uses real earnings reports with their inherent complexity, but narrower than general financial knowledge benchmarks because it focuses only on historical data interpretation
FinQA scores higher at 60/100 vs @iflow-mcp/db-mcp-tool at 21/100.
Need something different?
Search the match graph →© 2026 Unfragile. Stronger through disorder.
Enables evaluation of AI systems' ability to extract numerical data from both structured HTML/text tables and unstructured prose within the same document, then reason over the extracted values. The dataset contains questions where relevant data appears in different formats — some figures are in formatted tables with clear row/column headers, while others are embedded in narrative text or footnotes — requiring robust parsing and entity linking before computation can occur.
Unique: Combines structured table data with unstructured narrative in the same evaluation, forcing systems to handle format heterogeneity and resolve references across different data representations. Most table QA datasets use clean, isolated tables; this tests real-world document complexity.
vs alternatives: More realistic than isolated table QA benchmarks (like SQA or WikiTableQuestions) because it requires handling narrative context and format mixing, but simpler than full document understanding because tables are already in text format (no OCR needed)
Provides a curated, crowdsourced-annotated dataset of 8,281 question-answer pairs with multi-step reasoning requirements, enabling systematic evaluation of AI systems on financial numerical reasoning. The dataset includes quality control mechanisms through crowdworker annotation, answer validation against ground truth, and coverage across diverse financial metrics and company types within the S&P 500, creating a reproducible evaluation standard for the financial AI community.
Unique: Provides a publicly available, reproducible benchmark specifically designed for financial numerical reasoning with real SEC filings, enabling standardized comparison across different financial AI systems. Most financial datasets are proprietary or synthetic; this is open-source and authentic.
vs alternatives: More specialized and challenging than generic QA benchmarks (SQuAD, MRQA) because it requires financial domain knowledge and multi-step arithmetic, but narrower in scope than comprehensive financial understanding benchmarks because it focuses only on numerical reasoning
Assesses AI systems' ability to perform multi-hop reasoning by requiring them to locate and combine information from different sections of earnings reports. Questions may require finding a figure in the income statement, then locating a related metric in the balance sheet, then performing arithmetic across both — testing whether models can maintain context across document boundaries and understand relationships between different financial statement sections.
Unique: Embeds multi-hop reasoning requirements within authentic financial documents where hops correspond to real relationships between financial statement sections, rather than synthetic reasoning chains. This tests whether models understand domain structure, not just generic multi-hop patterns.
vs alternatives: More realistic than synthetic multi-hop datasets (HotpotQA, 2WikiMultiHopQA) because reasoning hops follow actual financial relationships, but less controlled because document structure varies and reasoning paths are implicit rather than explicitly annotated
Enables evaluation of whether AI systems can identify which arithmetic operations (addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, comparison) are required to answer financial questions, then execute them correctly. The dataset implicitly tests operation selection — a question asking 'what is the profit margin' requires division (net income / revenue), while 'what is total assets' requires addition — forcing models to understand financial semantics before applying math.
Unique: Embeds arithmetic operation selection within financial domain context, requiring models to understand that 'margin' semantically maps to division and 'total' maps to addition. This tests semantic grounding of operations, not just arithmetic execution.
vs alternatives: More semantically grounded than generic math word problem datasets because operation selection is implicit in financial terminology, but less explicit than datasets with annotated operation types because operations must be inferred
Provides evaluation capability for AI systems to compare financial metrics across multiple S&P 500 companies or aggregate metrics across different time periods within the same company's earnings reports. While individual questions reference single documents, the dataset structure enables evaluation of systems that can retrieve and compare relevant companies, requiring understanding of which metrics are comparable across entities and how to normalize for company size or accounting differences.
Unique: Provides a foundation for evaluating cross-company financial comparison by including diverse S&P 500 companies with different business models and scales, enabling assessment of whether systems can normalize and compare metrics appropriately. Most financial QA datasets focus on single-document questions.
vs alternatives: Enables cross-company evaluation unlike single-document QA datasets, but requires external retrieval and comparison logic because the dataset itself contains only single-document questions