Products API MCP Server
Mi primer proyecto MCP
Este proyecto demuestra el uso del servidor MCP (Protocolo de Contexto de Modelo) que recupera datos de la API DummyJSON . Desarrollado con Cursor IDE y el agente predeterminado.
Tabla de contenido
Related MCP server: openfoodfacts-mcp-server
Características
Herramientas API de productos
obtener_productos
Descripción: Obtenga una lista de productos con filtrado y paginación opcionales.
Parámetros:
id(cadena, opcional): Filtrar productos por IDq(cadena, opcional): Filtrar productos por títulocategory(cadena, opcional): Filtrar productos por categoríabrand(cadena, opcional): Filtrar productos por marcaprice(número, opcional): Filtrar productos por preciorating(número, opcional): Filtrar productos por calificaciónskip(número, opcional, predeterminado: 0): Número de productos a omitirlimit(número, opcional, predeterminado: 10): Número máximo de productos a devolver
Devoluciones: Una lista de productos que coinciden con los criterios especificados
Fuente de datos: API DummyJSON ( https://dummyjson.com/products )
Instalación y uso
Prerrequisitos
Node.js (versión 23 o superior)
Docker y Docker Compose
WSL2 (si usa Windows)
Configuración del cursor
Para configurar este servidor MCP con Cursor:
Cursor abierto
Prensa:
Windows/Linux:
Ctrl + Shift + PmacOS:
Cmd + Shift + P
Escriba "Configurar servidor MCP" y selecciónelo
Agregue la configuración adecuada según su configuración:
Para Windows (sin WSL) o Linux:
{
"mcpServers": {
"postgres": {
"command": "node",
"args": ["ABSOLUTE_PATH_TO_PROJECT/src/index.ts"]
}
}
}Para usuarios de WSL:
{
"mcpServers": {
"postgres": {
"command": "wsl.exe",
"args": [
"-e",
"ABSOLUTE_PATH_TO_NODE/.nvm/versions/node/v23.11.0/bin/node",
"ABSOLUTE_PATH_TO_PROJECT/src/index.ts"
]
}
}
}Para encontrar su ruta Node.js, ejecute:
which nodeLicencia
Este proyecto está licenciado bajo la licencia MIT.
Available Tools
1 toolget_productsC
Get a list of products with optional filtering and pagination.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | No | Filter products by ID | |
| q | No | Filter products by title | |
| category | No | Filter products by category | |
| brand | No | Filter products by brand | |
| price | No | Filter products by price | |
| rating | No | Filter products by rating | |
| skip | No | Number of products to skip | |
| limit | No | Maximum number of products to return |
TDQS
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 'optional filtering and pagination,' which hints at read-only behavior and some constraints, but it doesn't detail important aspects like rate limits, authentication needs, error handling, or the format of returned data. For a tool with 8 parameters and no annotations, this is a significant gap.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, efficient sentence that clearly states the tool's purpose and key features (filtering and pagination). It is front-loaded with the main action and avoids unnecessary details, making it highly concise and well-structured.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the complexity of 8 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, how results are structured, or any behavioral traits beyond basic functionality. For a tool with this level of detail in the schema but lacking output information, more context is needed to be complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The schema description coverage is 100%, meaning all parameters are well-documented in the input schema. The description adds minimal value beyond this by mentioning 'optional filtering and pagination,' which loosely corresponds to parameters like skip and limit, but it doesn't provide additional semantic context or examples. This meets the baseline score of 3 for high schema coverage.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Get a list of products' specifies the verb (get) and resource (products). It also mentions optional filtering and pagination, which adds useful context. However, since there are no sibling tools, it doesn't need to differentiate from alternatives, so it doesn't reach the highest score of 5.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
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 or any specific contexts for usage. It mentions optional filtering and pagination, but this is more about functionality than usage scenarios. Without any explicit when/when-not instructions or prerequisites, it falls short of higher scores.
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.
1 tool update
- First observed
get_products
TDQS
Scored across 1 tool
With only one tool, there is no possibility of ambiguity or overlap between tools. The single tool has a clear and distinct purpose of retrieving products with filtering and pagination capabilities.
The single tool name 'get_products' follows a consistent verb_noun pattern, and with only one tool, there is no inconsistency to evaluate. The naming is straightforward and predictable.
A server named 'Products API MCP Server' suggests a domain requiring CRUD operations, but it only provides a single 'get' tool. This is too few for the apparent scope, as it lacks create, update, delete, or other product-related operations, making it severely under-scoped.
The tool set is severely incomplete for a products API domain. It only supports retrieving products, with no coverage for creating, updating, deleting, or managing other aspects like categories or inventory. This will cause significant agent failures in typical product management workflows.
Maintenance
Related MCP Connectors
MCP server for Product Management
This MCP server provides seamless access to Malaysia's government open data, including datasets, w…
Related MCP Servers
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceA small MCP server that manages a product inventory using SQLite, providing CRUD operations through exposed MCP tools.-
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceMCP server for Open Food Facts, enabling food product lookup by barcode, search, nutrition facts, allergen checks, and eco-scores without an API key.8MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceMCP server for reading, querying, and filtering local JSON files with extended JSONPath syntax, supporting sorting, aggregations, and complex conditions.40 npm2MIT
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceAn MCP server that provides tools to interact with the JSONPlaceholder fake REST API for testing and prototyping, supporting CRUD operations on posts, comments, todos, and users.787 npmMIT