https://remote-mcp-server-authless.feraranas.workers.dev/
Mit diesem Beispiel können Sie einen Remote-MCP-Server bereitstellen, der keine Authentifizierung bei Cloudflare Workers erfordert.
Dadurch wird Ihr MCP-Server unter einer URL wie der folgenden bereitgestellt: remote-mcp-server-authless.<your-account>.workers.dev/sse
Alternativ können Sie die folgende Befehlszeile verwenden, um den Remote-MCP-Server auf Ihrem lokalen Computer zu erstellen:
npm create cloudflare@latest -- my-mcp-server --template=cloudflare/ai/demos/remote-mcp-authlessRelated MCP server: Remote MCP Server Authless
Um dem MCP-Server Ihre eigenen Tools hinzuzufügen, definieren Sie jedes Tool innerhalb der init() Methode von src/index.ts mit this.server.tool(...) .
Sie können vom Cloudflare AI Playground, einem Remote-MCP-Client, eine Verbindung zu Ihrem MCP-Server herstellen:
Gehen Sie zu https://playground.ai.cloudflare.com/
Geben Sie die URL Ihres bereitgestellten MCP-Servers ein ( remote-mcp-server-authless.<your-account>.workers.dev/sse ).
Sie können Ihre MCP-Tools jetzt direkt vom Spielplatz aus verwenden!
Sie können auch von lokalen MCP-Clients aus eine Verbindung zu Ihrem Remote-MCP-Server herstellen, indem Sie den MCP-Remote-Proxy verwenden.
Um von Claude Desktop aus eine Verbindung zu Ihrem MCP-Server herzustellen, folgen Sie der Schnellstartanleitung von Anthropic und gehen Sie in Claude Desktop zu Einstellungen > Entwickler > Konfiguration bearbeiten.
Update mit dieser Konfiguration:
{
"mcpServers": {
"calculator": {
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"mcp-remote",
"http://localhost:8787/sse" // or remote-mcp-server-authless.your-account.workers.dev/sse
]
}
}
}Starten Sie Claude neu und die Tools sollten verfügbar werden.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| a | Yes | ||
| b | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| operation | Yes | ||
| a | Yes | ||
| b | 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.
addcalculateScored across 2 tools
The two tools 'add' and 'calculate' are highly ambiguous without descriptions, as 'add' could be a subset of 'calculate' or vice versa, making it impossible to distinguish their purposes. This overlap creates a high risk of misselection, as agents cannot determine when to use one over the other based on the limited information provided.
The tool names 'add' and 'calculate' are both simple verbs, which provides some readability, but they lack a consistent pattern such as verb_noun or clear domain-specific conventions. The naming is mixed in style, with 'add' being a basic operation and 'calculate' being more general, but without descriptions, it's unclear if this reflects intentional design or inconsistency.
With only 2 tools, the server feels thin and under-scoped for most practical purposes, suggesting it may not cover a meaningful domain adequately. This low count is borderline inappropriate unless the server's purpose is extremely narrow, but without descriptions, it's hard to justify such minimalism, leaning toward too few tools for effective agent use.
The server is severely incomplete, as the lack of descriptions makes it impossible to infer a domain or assess coverage. With only vague tool names like 'add' and 'calculate', there are obvious gaps in any potential workflow, and agents will likely fail due to missing operations or unclear scope, rendering the tool surface non-functional for typical tasks.
Cloudflare Workers MCP server: ai-model-router
MCP server for AI agents to plan, verify, and deploy Cloudflare-native apps.
Cloudflare Workers MCP server: ai-gateway
A comprehensive Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that enables AI assistants to interact with yo…