MCP-FEISHU es un servidor de plano de control de microservicios (MCP) diseñado específicamente para la integración con Windsurf IDE. Obtiene información de la API de Feishu OpenAPI y la proporciona al cliente MCP del IDE, lo que permite una integración y gestión fluidas de la API en su entorno de desarrollo.
Se conecta a Feishu OpenAPI para recuperar especificaciones de API
Expone información de API como recursos MCP
Proporciona herramientas para el descubrimiento y exploración de API.
Admite pruebas de API e integración dentro de Windsurf IDE
Implementa el Protocolo de Contexto de Modelo (MCP) para la comunicación estandarizada
Related MCP server: Lark MCP Server
# Clone the repository
# git clone https://github.com/yourusername/mcp-feishu.git
# cd mcp-feishu
# Install dependencies
pnpm install
# Build the project
pnpm run buildpnpm startnpx @modelcontextprotocol/inspector node dist/index.jspnpm buildEn la configuración de Windsurf IDE, agregue un nuevo servidor MCP con la siguiente configuración:
"mcpServers": {
"feiShuServer": {
"command": "node",
"args": ["/Program Files/project/mcp-feishu/dist/index.js"],
"env": {
"APP_ID": "",
"APP_SECRET": "",
"TABLE_ID": "",
"APP_TOKEN": ""
}
}
}El servidor MCP-FEISHU expone los siguientes recursos:
api://projects - Lista todos los proyectos de API
api://projects/{projectId} - Obtener detalles de un proyecto específico
api://projects/{projectId}/apis - Enumera todas las API de un proyecto
api://projects/{projectId}/apis/{apiId} - Obtener detalles de una API específica
El servidor proporciona las siguientes herramientas:
get_defect_link - Obtener el enlace a un defecto específico
get_recently_updated_defect_list - Obtener una lista de defectos actualizados recientemente
# Run in development mode with hot reloading
npm run devInstituto Tecnológico de Massachusetts (MIT)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ID | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| status | Yes | ||
| startDate | Yes | ||
| endDate | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
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?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
get_defect_linkget_recently_updated_defect_listScored across 2 tools
The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: one retrieves a specific defect link, while the other fetches a list of recently updated defects. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them.
Both tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with 'get_' prefix and snake_case naming. The naming is predictable and uniform across the set.
With only 2 tools, the server feels thin for a domain like defect management in Feishu. This minimal set lacks essential operations like creating, updating, or deleting defects, making it under-scoped.
The tool surface is severely incomplete for defect management. It only provides read-only access to defects (link and list), missing critical CRUD operations such as create, update, delete, or search, which will cause agent failures in handling defect workflows.
MCP server for AI agents to plan, verify, and deploy Cloudflare-native apps.
MCP server for InsForge BaaS — database, storage, edge functions, and deployments
An MCP server that provides an API to LLMs to manage their JumpCloud resources.
MCP server for interacting with the Supabase platform
