Skip to main content
Glama
leejersey

Hexo Blog MCP Server

by leejersey

quick_publish

Publish Hexo blog posts to GitHub Pages and automatically back up source code with Git commits in a single operation.

Instructions

一键完成博客发布和源码备份(deploy + backup 组合操作)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
messageNo可选的 Git 提交信息

Implementation Reference

  • The 'quick_publish' tool is defined using server.tool, with its handler function implementing the deployment and backup logic.
    server.tool(
        "quick_publish",
        "一键完成博客发布和源码备份(deploy + backup 组合操作)",
        {
            message: z.string().optional().describe("可选的 Git 提交信息"),
        },
        async ({ message }) => {
            try {
                // 1. 部署
                await hexoCommand("clean");
                await hexoCommand("generate");
                await hexoCommand("deploy");
    
                // 2. 备份
                const backupResult = await backupSource(
                    message || "Publish & backup"
                );
    
                return {
                    content: [
                        {
                            type: "text" as const,
                            text: `🎉 一键发布完成!\n\n✅ 博客已发布: https://leejersey.github.io\n✅ ${backupResult}\n\n⚠️ GitHub Pages 需要 1~3 分钟刷新缓存。`,
                        },
                    ],
                };
            } catch (e: any) {
                return {
                    content: [{ type: "text" as const, text: `发布失败: ${e.message}` }],
                    isError: true,
                };
            }
        }
    );
Behavior2/5

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. It states the tool performs a combination of deploy and backup operations, implying mutation and data handling, but doesn't disclose critical traits like permissions needed, whether it's destructive, rate limits, or error handling. This is a significant gap for a tool with potential side effects.

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 concise and front-loaded in a single sentence: '一键完成博客发布和源码备份(deploy + backup 组合操作)'. It efficiently conveys the core purpose without unnecessary details. However, it could be slightly more structured by separating key points, but it earns its place as minimal waste.

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 the complexity (a combination tool with potential mutations) and no annotations or output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral traits, error handling, and what the tool returns. For a tool that likely involves significant operations, more context is needed to ensure safe and correct usage by 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?

The description adds no parameter semantics beyond what the input schema provides. Schema description coverage is 100%, with one optional parameter 'message' documented as '可选的 Git 提交信息' (optional Git commit message). The description doesn't mention parameters at all, so it relies entirely on the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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: '一键完成博客发布和源码备份' translates to 'one-click completion of blog publishing and source code backup.' It specifies the verb (complete) and resources (blog publishing, source code backup). However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish from siblings like 'deploy_blog' or 'backup_source,' which are mentioned as components but not compared.

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. It mentions 'deploy + backup 组合操作' (deploy + backup combination operation), implying it combines functions of 'deploy_blog' and 'backup_source,' but doesn't specify scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions. Without explicit when/when-not instructions, usage is unclear.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/leejersey/hexo-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server