hello-world-mcp
Click on "Install Server".
Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state.
In the chat, type
@followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@hello-world-mcpsay hello"
That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed.
Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.
Hello World MCP
Minimal Model Context Protocol server written in TypeScript.
What it does
This project starts a stdio-based MCP server with one tool:
helloreturnsHello, world!
Related MCP server: hello-world-mcp
Requirements
Node.js 18 or newer
npm
Install
npm installBuild
npm run buildRun
npm startFor development, you can recompile on change with:
npm run devCheck with MCP Inspector
MCP Inspector is a browser-based tool for testing MCP servers.
Build the server first:
npm run buildStart Inspector and point it at the TypeScript source directly:
npm run inspectOpen the Inspector UI in your browser at:
http://localhost:6274In the Inspector, connect to the server and call the
hellotool to verify the response.
This runs Inspector against src/index.ts through tsx, so you can test changes without rebuilding first.
Project files
src/index.ts contains the MCP server.
tsconfig.json contains the TypeScript compiler settings.
package.json contains the scripts and dependencies.
Available Tools
2 toolsdatetimeDate & TimeA
Returns the current date and time in ISO 8601 format.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses the return format but does not mention idempotency, side effects, or any constraints. Adequate for a simple read-only tool.
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?
Single sentence with no wasted words. Clearly communicates the tool's function.
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?
For a parameterless tool with no output schema and a single sibling, the description fully covers what the agent needs to know: it returns the current date and time in ISO 8601.
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?
No parameters exist; baseline score is 4 as per rules.
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?
The description clearly states the verb 'Returns' and the resource 'current date and time', specifying the output format ISO 8601. It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'hello' which is likely unrelated.
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?
The description provides clear context (returns current datetime) without exclusions or alternatives. Given only one sibling with a different purpose, no further guidance is needed.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
helloHello WorldA
Returns a hello world greeting.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. States it returns a greeting, which is safe and read-only, but doesn't mention any other traits like idempotency or side effects. Adequate for this trivial tool.
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?
Single sentence, front-loaded with the purpose. No unnecessary words. Highly concise and structured.
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?
For a tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description fully explains what it does. No additional context is necessary given the tool's simplicity.
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?
No parameters defined, so schema description coverage is 100%. Per guidelines, baseline is 4 for zero parameters. Description adds no extra parameter info, but none needed.
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?
Clearly states it returns a 'Hello World' greeting. Verb 'returns' and resource 'greeting' are specific and unambiguous. No sibling confusion with 'datetime'.
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?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only states what it does, not when it's appropriate or when not to use it.
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.
2 tool updates
v0.1.0- First observed
datetime - First observed
hello
TDQS
Scored across 2 tools
The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: datetime returns the current date/time, and hello returns a greeting. There is no ambiguity or overlap.
Both tool names are single-word, lowercase nouns that directly describe their function. The naming pattern is consistent and intuitive.
With exactly two tools, the server is minimal but well-scoped for its 'hello world' purpose. Each tool serves a clear role without unnecessary complexity.
For a simple demonstration server, the tool set is complete. It provides a greeting and a current date/time, which covers typical 'hello world' use cases. No obvious gaps.
Maintenance
Resources
Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.
Looking for Admin?
If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.
Related MCP Connectors
POC MCP server. Tool say_hello returns 'Welcome' (agent -> MCP -> API path).
MCP server for progressive tool usage at any scale (see https://klavis.ai)
Related MCP Servers
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceA simple MCP server with hello and echo tools, built using the MCPize framework.-
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceA simple Model Context Protocol server that provides a hello world greeting tool, serving as a boilerplate template for quickly creating new MCP servers.16MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceA minimal MCP server offering a hello_world tool that returns a greeting and current UTC time via streamable HTTP.-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceA simple MCP server built with MCPize providing hello and echo tools for demonstration purposes.3MIT