Skip to main content
Glama
enesjakozh
Sunwood-ai-labs

Iris MCP Server

by Sunwood-ai-labs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Hybrid

🌈 Iris MCP Server

📝 概要

Iris MCP Serverは、Gitリポジトリのタグベースのリリースノートを自動生成するためのModel Context Protocolサーバーです。タグ間の差分を解析し、構造化されたリリースノートを.irisディレクトリに生成します。

Related MCP server: MCP Server

✨ 特徴

  • 🏷️ タグ間の差分を自動検出

  • 📊 カスタマイズ可能なリリースノートテンプレート

  • 🗂️ 新機能、改善項目、バグ修正などのカテゴリ分け

  • 📄 Markdown形式での出力

  • 📁 .irisフォルダへの自動保存

🚀 インストール

npm install iris-mcp-server

💡 使用方法

リリースノートの生成

const result = await mcpClient.useTool('iris-mcp-server', 'generate_release_note', {
  startTag: 'v1.0.0',
  endTag: 'v1.1.0',
  title: 'Version 1.1.0 リリース',
  features: [
    '新しいダッシュボード機能の追加',
    'ユーザー管理システムの実装'
  ],
  improvements: [
    'パフォーマンスの最適化',
    'UIの改善'
  ],
  bugfixes: [
    'ログイン時のエラー修正',
    'データ同期の問題を解決'
  ],
  breaking: [
    'APIエンドポイントの変更',
    '設定ファイルのフォーマット更新'
  ]
});

📄 出力例

# Version 1.1.0 リリース

リリース日: 2024-01-20

## 💥 破壊的変更

- APIエンドポイントの変更
- 設定ファイルのフォーマット更新

## ✨ 新機能

- 新しいダッシュボード機能の追加
- ユーザー管理システムの実装

## 🔧 改善項目

- パフォーマンスの最適化
- UIの改善

## 🐛 バグ修正

- ログイン時のエラー修正
- データ同期の問題を解決

## 📝 変更されたファイル

- `src/dashboard/index.ts`
- `src/users/management.ts`
- `config/settings.json`

🛠️ 開発

ビルド

npm run build

開発モード

npm run watch

🤝 コントリビューション

プルリクエストやイシューは大歓迎です！以下の手順で貢献できます：

  1. このリポジトリをフォーク

  2. 新しいブランチを作成 (git checkout -b feature/amazing-feature)

  3. 変更をコミット (git commit -m '✨ Add amazing feature')

  4. ブランチをプッシュ (git push origin feature/amazing-feature)

  5. プルリクエストを作成

📜 ライセンス

MIT

👥 作者

Available Tools

1 tool
generate_release_noteB

タグ間の差分からリリースノートを生成します

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
breakingNo破壊的変更の一覧（オプション）
bugfixesNoバグ修正の一覧（オプション）
endTagYes終了タグ
featuresNo新機能の一覧（オプション）
improvementsNo改善項目の一覧（オプション）
startTagYes開始タグ
titleNoリリースノートのタイトル（オプション）

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the action (generating release notes) but lacks details on behavioral traits like required permissions, rate limits, output format, or error handling. For a tool with 7 parameters and no annotations, this is a significant gap in transparency, though it doesn't contradict any annotations.

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 a single, efficient sentence in Japanese that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, with every part contributing essential information. This makes it easy for an AI agent to parse quickly.

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 complexity (7 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate but has clear gaps. It explains the core function but lacks details on behavioral aspects, usage context, and output handling. Without annotations or an output schema, more completeness is needed for effective tool invocation, though it meets a basic threshold.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what's in the input schema, which has 100% coverage with clear descriptions for all 7 parameters (e.g., '開始タグ' for startTag, '破壊的変更の一覧' for breaking). Since the schema fully documents parameters, the baseline score is 3, as the description doesn't compensate but doesn't need to given the high schema coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'タグ間の差分からリリースノートを生成します' (Generates release notes from differences between tags). It specifies the verb '生成します' (generates) and the resource 'リリースノート' (release notes), with the method 'タグ間の差分から' (from differences between tags). However, with no sibling tools provided, it cannot demonstrate differentiation from alternatives, preventing a 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.

Usage Guidelines2/5

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, prerequisites, or exclusions. It states what the tool does but offers no context for its application, such as when it's appropriate for generating release notes from tag diffs versus other methods. This lack of usage instructions limits its effectiveness for an AI agent.

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. 1 tool updatev1.0.0
    • First observedgenerate_release_note
Deploy Server
Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Scored across 1 tool

Disambiguation5/5

With only one tool, there is no possibility of ambiguity or overlap between tools. The tool's purpose is clearly defined as generating release notes from tag differences, making it impossible for an agent to confuse it with another tool.

Naming Consistency5/5

Since there is only a single tool, naming consistency is inherently perfect. The tool name 'generate_release_note' follows a clear verb_noun pattern, and there are no other tools to create inconsistency with.

Tool Count2/5

A single tool is too few for a server's purpose, as it severely limits functionality and suggests an incomplete or overly narrow scope. This makes the server feel thin and impractical for most agent workflows, as it lacks the breadth needed for typical operations in its domain.

Completeness2/5

The server is severely incomplete for any reasonable domain involving release notes. While the tool can generate notes, there are obvious gaps such as creating, updating, deleting, or listing release notes, and no coverage for related operations like managing tags or integrating with version control systems, which will cause agent failures in real-world scenarios.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

  • MCP Server

    Nawaf-TBE
    A
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    A Node.js/TypeScript server implementing the Model Context Protocol that provides integrations with GitHub and Notion, allowing automated workflow between these platforms via API endpoints.
    1,439 npm
    MIT

  • GitHub MCP Server

    archish9
    A
    license
    A
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    A Model Context Protocol server that provides Git version control operations as structured tools for AI coding agents. It enables LLMs to programmatically manage repositories through actions like committing changes, rolling back code, and comparing diffs.
    10
    Apache 2.0

Appeared in Searches