Skip to main content
Glama
yigitkonur

example-mcp-server-stdio

by yigitkonur

Demo Progress

demo_progress

Demonstrates progress notifications with five sequential updates to show task completion status.

Instructions

Demonstrate progress notifications with 5 updates

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
messageYes
progressStepsYes

Implementation Reference

  • Output schema definition for the demo_progress tool, defining structured output with message and progressSteps array using Zod validation.
    const demoProgressOutputSchema = {
      message: z.string(),
      progressSteps: z.array(z.number()),
    };
  • src/server.ts:580-587 (registration)
    Registration of the demo_progress tool with server.registerTool, including empty input schema and reference to output schema.
    server.registerTool(
      'demo_progress',
      {
        title: 'Demo Progress',
        description: 'Demonstrate progress notifications with 5 updates',
        inputSchema: {},
        outputSchema: demoProgressOutputSchema,
      },
  • Handler function for demo_progress tool that simulates progress by sending 5 notifications with increasing progress (20%,40%,etc.) using sendNotification, then returns completion message with structured content.
      async (_, { sendNotification }) => {
        log.info('Executing demo_progress');
        requestCount++;
    
        const progressId = 'demo-progress-task';
    
        for (let i = 1; i <= 5; i++) {
          await new Promise((resolve) => setTimeout(resolve, 500));
          await sendNotification({
            method: 'notifications/progress',
            params: {
              progressToken: progressId,
              progress: i * 20,
              message: `Step ${i} of 5 - Processing complex calculations...`,
            },
          });
        }
    
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: 'text',
              text: 'Progress demonstration completed',
            },
          ],
          structuredContent: {
            message: 'Progress demonstration completed',
            progressSteps: [20, 40, 60, 80, 100],
          },
        };
      },
    );
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 mentions 'progress notifications' and '5 updates', implying a sequence of updates, but doesn't specify whether this is a read-only demonstration, if it modifies any state, what triggers the updates, or any rate limits or side effects. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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, efficient sentence: 'Demonstrate progress notifications with 5 updates'. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and includes a specific detail (5 updates) without any redundant or verbose language. Every word earns its place.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, output schema exists), the description is minimally adequate. It states what the tool does but lacks context on usage, behavior, or output. The output schema likely covers return values, so the description doesn't need to explain those. However, for a demonstration tool with no annotations, more behavioral context would be helpful.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter information is needed. The description doesn't add any parameter details, which is appropriate here. Baseline is 4 for 0 parameters, as the schema fully covers the absence of inputs.

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: 'Demonstrate progress notifications with 5 updates'. It specifies the verb ('Demonstrate') and resource ('progress notifications'), and provides a concrete detail about the number of updates. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'maintenance_mode' or 'advanced_calculate', which could also involve progress or notifications.

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 doesn't mention any specific contexts, prerequisites, or exclusions, nor does it refer to sibling tools. The agent must infer usage based solely on the tool name and description, which is insufficient for informed selection.

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/yigitkonur/example-mcp-server-stdio'

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