Skip to main content
Glama
enesjakozh
coinselor

MCP Server Starter

by coinselor
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript

MCP Server Starter

A production-ready starter template for building Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers with TypeScript.

🚀 Quick Start

  1. Clone the repository

  2. Install dependencies:

    bun install

Related MCP server: MCP Server Starter

✨ Key Features

  • Bun for fast testing and development

  • Biome for linting and formatting

  • Automated version management with standard-version

  • Clean, maintainable project structure

📂 Project Structure

mcp-starter/
├── src/
│   ├── tools/          # MCP tools implementation
│   ├── utils/          # Shared utilities
│   ├── main.ts         # Server entry point
│   └── types.ts        # Shared type definitions
├── tests/              # Test files
├── biome.json          # Linting configuration
├── tsconfig.json       # TypeScript configuration
└── package.json        # Project dependencies

⚙️ Configuration

Creating New Tools

The project includes a script to help create new MCP tools:

bun run scripts/create-tool.ts <tool-name>

This will:

  1. Create a new tool directory under src/tools/<tool-name>

  2. Generate the basic tool structure including:

    • index.ts (main implementation)

    • schema.ts (JSON schema for tool parameters)

    • test.ts (test file)

  3. Update the tools index file to export the new tool

Example:

bun run scripts/create-tool.ts weather

🛠️ Development

  • Run tests: bun test

  • Format code: bun run format

  • Lint code: bun run lint

  • Build project: bun run build

To add your development MCP server to Claude Desktop:

  1. Build the project:

    bun run build

  2. Add to your Claude Desktop config:

    // You only need the argument if you need to pass arguments to your server
{
  "mcpServers": {
    "your-server-name": {
      "command": "node",
      "args": ["/path/to/your/project/dist/main.js", "some_argument"]
    }
  }
}

📜 Version Management

This project uses standard-version for automated version management. Run bun run release to create a new version.

Commit Message Format

  • feat: New feature (bumps minor version)

  • fix: Bug fix (bumps patch version)

  • BREAKING CHANGE: Breaking change (bumps major version)

📦 Publishing to npm

  1. Ensure you're logged in to npm:

    npm login

  2. Build the project:

    bun run build

  3. Publish the package:

    npm publish

Remember to update the version number using bun run release before publishing new versions.

Installing from npm (after publishing)

Add to your Claude Desktop config:

// You only need the argument if you need to pass arguments to your server
{
  "mcpServers": {
    "your-server-name": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "your-package-name", "some_argument"]
    }
  }
}

Available Tools

1 tool
hello_toolD

Hello tool

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesThe name of the person to greet

TDQS

D1.8/5.0
Behavior1/5

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. 'Hello tool' reveals nothing about whether this is a read/write operation, what permissions might be required, what side effects occur, or what the response format looks like. The description fails to provide any behavioral context beyond the minimal implication from the name.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

While technically concise with only two words, this represents under-specification rather than effective conciseness. The description doesn't contain enough information to be useful, and the single phrase doesn't earn its place by providing meaningful guidance to an AI agent.

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?

Given that there are no annotations and no output schema, the description should provide more complete context about what this tool does and what to expect. A single-parameter tool with 100% schema coverage could get by with minimal description, but 'Hello tool' fails to explain the basic purpose and behavior adequately for an AI agent.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already fully documents the single 'name' parameter. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what's in the schema. According to scoring rules, when schema coverage is high (>80%), the baseline is 3 even with no parameter information in the description.

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

Purpose2/5

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

The description 'Hello tool' is essentially a tautology that restates the tool name without specifying what it does. It doesn't provide a clear verb+resource combination or explain the actual function. While the name suggests greeting functionality, the description fails to articulate this explicitly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines1/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides absolutely no guidance about when to use this tool, what context it's appropriate for, or any prerequisites. There are no sibling tools mentioned, but even basic usage context is completely missing from the description text.

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 update
    • First observedhello_tool
Deploy Server
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

TDQS

C2.3/5.0

Scored across 1 tool

Disambiguation5/5

With only one tool, there is no possibility of ambiguity or overlap between tools, as there are no other tools to compare it to. The single tool's purpose is clearly distinct by default, eliminating any risk of misselection.

Naming Consistency5/5

The tool name 'hello_tool' follows a consistent snake_case pattern, and with only one tool, there is no inconsistency in naming conventions. The naming is straightforward and predictable within this minimal set.

Tool Count2/5

A single tool is generally too few for a server's purpose, as it suggests a very limited or trivial scope that may not support meaningful agent workflows. This is borderline for appropriateness, leaning toward insufficient coverage for typical MCP server use cases.

Completeness1/5

With only one tool named 'hello_tool', the server's domain is unclear, making it impossible to assess coverage meaningfully. There are likely significant gaps for any inferred purpose, as a single tool cannot provide CRUD/lifecycle operations or a coherent workflow, leading to severe incompleteness.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

Appeared in Searches