Qiskit MCP Server

by barvhaim

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

implement_qft

Construct a Quantum Fourier Transform circuit for a specified number of qubits, with optional inverse implementation.

Instructions

Implement Quantum Fourier Transform circuit.

Args: num_qubits: Number of qubits for QFT inverse: Whether to implement inverse QFT name: Optional custom name for the circuit

Returns: Success message with QFT circuit details

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "num_qubits": "<num_qubits>"
    },
    "name": "implement_qft"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`num_qubits`	Yes
`inverse`	No
`name`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jun 11, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full burden. It only states that the tool implements a QFT circuit and returns a success message. It does not disclose whether it modifies an existing circuit, creates a new one, or any side effects or permissions needed.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is structured as a clear docstring with Args and Returns sections. It is concise with no unnecessary words. The first sentence immediately states the purpose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description lacks important context such as how the circuit is created (e.g., does it start a new circuit or append to existing?), and the return value is vaguely described as 'Success message'. Given the output schema exists, the return description is acceptable but the overall behavioral context is insufficient.

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 description provides meaningful explanations for all 3 parameters: 'num_qubits' is number of qubits, 'inverse' is for inverse QFT, 'name' is optional custom name. This adds value beyond the schema, which only has titles. Schema coverage is 0%, so the description compensates well.

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 tool name 'implement_qft' and description 'Implement Quantum Fourier Transform circuit.' clearly state the action (implement) and resource (QFT circuit). It distinguishes from siblings like 'create_quantum_circuit' or 'add_gates' which are generic.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, context, or when not to use. It simply states what it does.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server