Skip to main content
Glama
enesjakozh
wudongjie

Sample MCP Server

by wudongjie
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

sample-mcp-server MCP 服务器

模型上下文协议服务器

这是一个基于 TypeScript 的 MCP 服务器，实现了一个简单的笔记系统。它通过提供以下内容来演示 MCP 的核心概念：

  • 用 URI 和元数据表示文本注释的资源

  • 创建新笔记的工具

  • 生成笔记摘要的提示

特征

资源

  • 通过note:// URI 列出并访问笔记

  • 每个笔记都有标题、内容和元数据

  • 用于简单内容访问的纯文本 MIME 类型

工具

  • create_note创建新的文本注释

    • 将标题和内容作为必需参数

    • 将注释存储在服务器状态中

提示

  • summarize_notes - 生成所有存储笔记的摘要

    • 包含所有笔记内容作为嵌入资源

    • 返回 LLM 摘要的结构化提示

Related MCP server: azure-devops MCP Server

发展

安装依赖项：

npm install

构建服务器：

npm run build

对于使用自动重建的开发：

npm run watch

安装

要与 Claude Desktop 一起使用，请添加服务器配置：

在 MacOS 上： ~/Library/Application Support/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json在 Windows 上： %APPDATA%/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "sample-mcp-server": {
      "command": "/path/to/sample-mcp-server/build/index.js"
    }
  }
}

调试

由于 MCP 服务器通过 stdio 进行通信，调试起来可能比较困难。我们推荐使用MCP Inspector ，它以包脚本的形式提供：

npm run inspector

检查器将提供一个 URL 来访问浏览器中的调试工具。

Available Tools

1 tool
addA

Add two numbers

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
aYes
bYes

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Add two numbers' accurately describes a pure, stateless, non-destructive operation. For such a simple arithmetic tool, this is sufficient transparency, though it could explicitly state that it has no 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.

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the essential action without any unnecessary words. It is highly concise and structured effectively.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given the tool's extreme simplicity (add two numbers), the description is largely complete. It could mention the return value (the sum), but that is easily inferred. The lack of output schema does not significantly degrade completeness here.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% – the description does not explain the two parameters 'a' and 'b' or their roles beyond what the schema already provides. With no additional meaning added, this dimension is severely lacking.

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 description clearly states 'Add two numbers', specifying the verb 'add' and the resource 'two numbers'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like sub, mul, div, mod, and sqrt, which perform different operations.

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. For example, it does not explain when addition is preferred over subtraction or multiplication. The usage context is entirely implied.

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 observedadd
Deploy Server
Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Scored across 1 tool

Disambiguation5/5

With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusion or overlap between tools. The tool 'add' has a clear and distinct purpose of adding two numbers, making disambiguation trivial.

Naming Consistency5/5

Since there is only one tool, naming consistency is inherently perfect. The tool name 'add' follows a simple verb-based pattern, and there are no other tools to compare it against for inconsistency.

Tool Count2/5

A single tool for an MCP server is generally too few for meaningful scope, as it limits functionality and indicates a trivial or incomplete implementation. While it might suit a minimal demo, it lacks the breadth expected for most server purposes.

Completeness1/5

The tool surface is severely incomplete; with only an 'add' tool, there are obvious gaps such as subtraction, multiplication, or other basic arithmetic operations. This makes the server impractical for any real-world mathematical tasks.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers