microCMS MCP Server
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| MICROCMS_API_KEY | Yes | microCMSのAPIキー（必須） | |
| MICROCMS_ENDPOINT | No | 利用するエンドポイント | |
| MICROCMS_SERVICE_DOMAIN | Yes | microCMSのサービスドメイン（必須） |
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Server capabilities have not been inspected yet.
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| SearchMicroCMSC | Search content in MicroCMS |
| GetMicroCMSContentC | Get specific content from MicroCMS by ID |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 2 tools
The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: GetMicroCMSContent retrieves a specific item by ID, while SearchMicroCMS performs a broader query across content. There is no overlap in functionality, making it easy for an agent to choose the right tool for the task.
Both tools follow a consistent naming pattern with a verb (Get or Search) followed by the domain (MicroCMS) and a noun (Content). They use consistent PascalCase styling, making the naming predictable and readable.
With only two tools, the server feels under-scoped for a content management system. It lacks essential CRUD operations like create, update, or delete, which are typically expected for managing content. The count is too low for the apparent domain.
The toolset is severely incomplete for a CMS server. It only provides read operations (get and search), missing create, update, delete, and other lifecycle management functions. This will cause agent failures when full content management is required.