Skip to main content
Glama
Chenzhi-Ana

feishu_mcp_server

by Chenzhi-Ana
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersScoreDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

飞书MCP机器人

目标

通过将飞书机器人用MCP server 代理，可以让cursor或者Claude的用户，可以结合LLM的模型后使用飞书机器人执行业务逻辑

+----------------+      +-------------+      +-------------+      +----------------+
|                |      |             |      |             |      |                |
| Claude/Cursor  |----->| MCP Client  |----->| MCP Server  |----->| 飞书机器人      |
|                |      |             |      |             |      |                |
+----------------+      +-------------+      +-------------+      +----------------+


调用流程说明:
1. Claude/Cursor 通过 MCP Client 发送请求
2. MCP Client 将请求转发给 MCP Server
3. MCP Server 处理请求并调用飞书机器人API
4. 飞书机器人与飞书API交互

``

## 配置
uv --directory YOUR_PATH run bot.py --webhook YOUR_WEB_HOOK

替换这两部分为你的路径和机器人地址即可

### Installing via Smithery

To install feishu_mcp_server for Claude Desktop automatically via [Smithery](https://smithery.ai/server/@Chenzhi-Ana/feishu_mcp_server):

```bash
npx -y @smithery/cli install @Chenzhi-Ana/feishu_mcp_server --client claude

Installing Manually

Available Tools

1 tool
send_messageA
发送飞书消息

Args:
    state: 要发送的消息内容
ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
stateYes

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
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 for behavioral disclosure. However, it only restates the basic send operation without mentioning side effects (e.g., message delivery, error handling, or async behavior). This is minimal transparency for a mutation-like action.

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: a single sentence plus a parameter explanation. Every word earns its place, and it is appropriately sized for a tool with one parameter.

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 low complexity (one param, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally viable. It explains what the tool does and what the parameter means, but lacks disclosure on side effects, return behavior, or any operational context. It is sufficient for a simple send operation but not richer.

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 parameter 'state' has no description in the schema (0% coverage). The description explicitly defines it as '要发送的消息内容' (the message content to send), adding critical meaning that the schema lacks. This effectively compensates for the schema gap.

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 tool's function: '发送飞书消息' (Send Feishu message). This is a specific verb (send) plus resource (Feishu message), and with no siblings listed, there's no ambiguity about its purpose.

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 given on when to use this tool, prerequisites, or alternatives. The description is purely functional without any contextual usage direction.

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.

  1. 1 tool updatev0.1.0
    • First observedsend_message
Install Server
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusion between tools. The tool's purpose is clear: it sends a Feishu message.

Naming Consistency5/5

The single tool follows a clear verb_noun pattern (send_message), which is consistent with standard naming conventions. There are no other tools to introduce inconsistency.

Tool Count2/5

A Feishu MCP server with only a send_message tool is extremely limited. Feishu offers a wide range of APIs, and one tool is far too few for the apparent scope of a server dedicated to the platform.

Completeness1/5

The server only supports sending messages, lacking essential operations like reading messages, listing chats, searching, or managing contacts. This is a severely incomplete surface for a Feishu integration.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.

Looking for Admin?

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

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

Latest Blog Posts

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/Chenzhi-Ana/feishu_mcp_server'

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