Skip to main content
Glama
deenesjakoruzh
zhangpanda

GoMCP

by zhangpanda
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Go
Hybrid

GoMCP

Go Version License Release gomcp MCP server

GoでMCPサーバーを構築するための、高速で慣用的な方法。

中文文档

🚀 クイックリンク

Related MCP server: Filesystem MCP Server

🎯 GoMCPとは？

GoMCPは、単なるSDKではなく、Model Context Protocol (MCP) サーバーを構築するためのフレームワークです。**「MCPのためのGin」**と考えてください。

MCPは、AIアプリケーション（Claude Desktop、Cursor、Kiro、VS Code Copilotなど）が外部ツールを呼び出し、データソースを読み取り、プロンプトテンプレートを使用できるようにするためのオープンプロトコルです。GoMCPを使えば、それらのサーバー構築が非常に簡単になります。

なぜGoMCPなのか？

mcp-go (mark3labs)

公式Go SDK

GoMCP

レベル

SDK

SDK

フレームワーク

スキーマ生成

手動

jsonschema タグ

mcp タグ + 自動バリデーション

ミドルウェア

基本的なフック

なし

フルチェーン (Logger, Auth, RateLimit, OTel…)

ツールグループ

なし

なし

あり (user.get, admin.delete)

Ginルートのインポート

なし

なし

✅ 1行で可能

OpenAPI/Swaggerのインポート

なし

なし

✅ 1行で可能

gRPCサービスのインポート

なし

なし

✅

組み込み認証

なし

なし

Bearer, API Key, Basic + RBAC

インスペクターUI

なし

なし

✅

テストユーティリティ

基本的

なし

mcptest パッケージ

🛠️ 技術スタック

環境要件

要件

バージョン

Go

≥ 1.25

MCP Protocol

2024-11-05 (2025-11-25と後方互換性あり)

コア依存関係

技術

説明

Go標準ライブラリ

コアフレームワーク — 外部依存関係ゼロ

Gin

アダプターのみ — 既存のGinルートをインポート

gRPC

アダプターのみ — gRPCサービスをインポート

OpenTelemetry

オプション — 分散トレーシング

YAML v3

プロバイダーのみ — ツール定義のホットリロード

🌟 主な機能

🔧 ツール開発

  • 構造体タグによる自動スキーマ生成 — Goの構造体と mcp タグでパラメーターを定義し、JSON Schemaを自動生成

  • 型付きハンドラー — func(*Context, Input) (Output, error) — 手動でのパラメーター解析は不要

  • パラメーターバリデーション — 必須、最小/最大、enum、パターン — ハンドラー実行前にチェック

  • コンポーネントのバージョン管理 — 複数のバージョンを登録し、クライアントは name@version で呼び出し可能

  • 非同期タスク — 長時間実行されるツールはタスクIDを返し、ポーリングとキャンセルが可能

🔌 アダプター (コアとなる差別化要因)

  • Ginアダプター — 既存のGinルートを1行でMCPツールとしてインポート

  • OpenAPIアダプター — Swagger/OpenAPI 3.xドキュメントからツールを生成

  • gRPCアダプター — gRPCサービスメソッドをMCPツールとしてインポート

🔐 セキュリティ

  • BearerAuth — JWTトークン検証

  • APIKeyAuth — ヘッダー経由のAPIキー検証

  • BasicAuth — HTTP基本認証

  • RequireRole / RequirePermission — ツールグループに対するRBAC認可

🧩 フレームワーク機能

  • ミドルウェアチェーン — Logger, Recovery, RequestID, Timeout, RateLimit, OpenTelemetry

  • ツールグループ — プレフィックスとグループ単位のミドルウェアでツールを整理

  • リソース & プロンプト — URIテンプレートやパラメーター付きプロンプトを含むMCPを完全サポート

  • 自動補完 — プロンプト/リソース引数の値を提案

🚀 本番環境対応

  • マルチトランスポート — stdio (Claude Desktop, Cursor, Kiro) および SSE対応のストリーミングHTTP

  • MCP Inspector — ツールの閲覧とテストのための組み込みWebデバッグUI

  • ホットリロード — ファイル監視機能付きでYAMLファイルからツール定義を読み込み

  • mcptestパッケージ — スナップショット対応のユニットテスト用インメモリクライアント

🏗️ アーキテクチャ

┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                        User Code                             │
│   s.Tool() / s.ToolFunc() / s.Resource() / s.Prompt()        │
├──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│                     Framework Core                           │
│   Router → Middleware Chain → Validation → Handler → Result   │
├────────────┬─────────────┬───────────────┬───────────────────┤
│   Schema   │  Validator  │   Adapters    │  Observability    │
│  Generator │   Engine    │ Gin/OpenAPI/  │  OTel / Logger    │
│ (mcp tags) │ (auto)      │ gRPC          │  / Inspector      │
├────────────┴─────────────┴───────────────┴───────────────────┤
│                     Protocol Layer                           │
│          JSON-RPC 2.0 / MCP / Capability Negotiation         │
├──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│                     Transport Layer                          │
│              stdio  /  Streamable HTTP + SSE                 │
└──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

プロジェクト構造

gomcp/
├── server.go              # Server core, tool/resource/prompt registration
├── context.go             # Request context with typed accessors
├── group.go               # Tool groups with prefix naming
├── middleware.go           # Middleware interface and chain execution
├── middleware_builtin.go   # Logger, Recovery, RequestID, Timeout, RateLimit
├── middleware_auth.go      # BearerAuth, APIKeyAuth, BasicAuth, RBAC
├── middleware_otel.go      # OpenTelemetry tracing
├── schema/                # struct tag → JSON Schema generator + validator
├── transport/             # stdio + Streamable HTTP
├── adapter/               # Gin, OpenAPI, gRPC adapters
├── mcptest/               # Testing utilities
├── task.go                # Async task support
├── completion.go          # Auto-completions
├── inspector.go           # Web debug UI
├── provider.go            # Hot-reload from YAML
└── examples/              # Working examples

📦 インストール

go get github.com/zhangpanda/gomcp

⚡ クイックスタート

5行で動作するMCPサーバー

package main

import (
    "fmt"
    "github.com/zhangpanda/gomcp"
)

type SearchInput struct {
    Query string `json:"query" mcp:"required,desc=Search keyword"`
    Limit int    `json:"limit" mcp:"default=10,min=1,max=100"`
}

type SearchResult struct {
    Items []string `json:"items"`
    Total int      `json:"total"`
}

func main() {
    s := gomcp.New("my-server", "1.0.0")

    s.ToolFunc("search", "Search documents by keyword", func(ctx *gomcp.Context, in SearchInput) (SearchResult, error) {
        items := []string{fmt.Sprintf("Result for %q", in.Query)}
        return SearchResult{Items: items, Total: len(items)}, nil
    })

    s.Stdio()
}

SearchInput 構造体は、以下のJSON Schemaを自動生成します：

{
  "type": "object",
  "properties": {
    "query": { "type": "string", "description": "Search keyword" },
    "limit": { "type": "integer", "default": 10, "minimum": 1, "maximum": 100 }
  },
  "required": ["query"]
}

無効なパラメーターは、ハンドラーが実行される前に拒否されます：

validation failed: query: required; limit: must be <= 100

📖 使用ガイド

構造体タグリファレンス

タグ

型

説明

例

required

フラグ

フィールドが必須

mcp:"required"

desc

文字列

人間が読める説明

mcp:"desc=検索キーワード"

default

任意

デフォルト値

mcp:"default=10"

min

数値

最小値 (含む)

mcp:"min=0"

max

数値

最大値 (含む)

mcp:"max=100"

enum

文字列

パイプ区切りの許可値

`mcp:"enum=asc

desc"`

pattern

文字列

正規表現バリデーション

mcp:"pattern=^[a-z]+$"

組み合わせ: mcp:"required,desc=ユーザーメールアドレス,pattern=^[^@]+@[^@]+$"

サポートされている型: string, int, float64, bool, []T, ネストされた構造体。

ツール

シンプルなハンドラー:

s.Tool("hello", "Say hello", func(ctx *gomcp.Context) (*gomcp.CallToolResult, error) {
    return ctx.Text("Hello, " + ctx.String("name")), nil
})

型付きハンドラー (推奨):

type Input struct {
    Name  string `json:"name"  mcp:"required,desc=User name"`
    Email string `json:"email" mcp:"required,pattern=^[^@]+@[^@]+$"`
}

s.ToolFunc("create_user", "Create user", func(ctx *gomcp.Context, in Input) (User, error) {
    return db.CreateUser(in.Name, in.Email)
})

リソース

// Static
s.Resource("config://app", "App config", func(ctx *gomcp.Context) (any, error) {
    return map[string]any{"version": "1.0"}, nil
})

// Dynamic URI template
s.ResourceTemplate("db://{table}/{id}", "DB record", func(ctx *gomcp.Context) (any, error) {
    return db.Find(ctx.String("table"), ctx.String("id")), nil
})

プロンプト

s.Prompt("code_review", "Code review",
    []gomcp.PromptArgument{gomcp.PromptArg("language", "Language", true)},
    func(ctx *gomcp.Context) ([]gomcp.PromptMessage, error) {
        return []gomcp.PromptMessage{
            gomcp.UserMsg(fmt.Sprintf("Review this %s code for bugs.", ctx.String("language"))),
        }, nil
    },
)

ミドルウェア

s.Use(gomcp.Logger())                              // Log tool name + duration
s.Use(gomcp.Recovery())                            // Recover from panics
s.Use(gomcp.RequestID())                           // Unique request ID
s.Use(gomcp.Timeout(10 * time.Second))             // Deadline enforcement
s.Use(gomcp.RateLimit(100))                        // 100 calls/minute
s.Use(gomcp.OpenTelemetry())                       // Distributed tracing
s.Use(gomcp.BearerAuth(tokenValidator))            // JWT auth
s.Use(gomcp.APIKeyAuth("X-API-Key", keyValidator)) // API key auth

カスタムミドルウェア:

func AuditLog() gomcp.Middleware {
    return func(ctx *gomcp.Context, next func() error) error {
        start := time.Now()
        err := next()
        log.Printf("tool=%s duration=%s err=%v", ctx.String("_tool_name"), time.Since(start), err)
        return err
    }
}

ツールグループ

user := s.Group("user", authMiddleware)
user.Tool("get", "Get user", getUser)              // → user.get
user.Tool("update", "Update user", updateUser)      // → user.update

admin := user.Group("admin", gomcp.RequireRole("admin"))
admin.Tool("delete", "Delete user", deleteUser)     // → user.admin.delete

アダプター

Gin — 既存のAPIを1行でインポート:

adapter.ImportGin(s, ginRouter, adapter.ImportOptions{
    IncludePaths: []string{"/api/v1/"},
})
// GET /api/v1/users/:id → Tool get_api_v1_users_by_id (id = required param)

OpenAPI — Swaggerドキュメントから生成:

adapter.ImportOpenAPI(s, "./swagger.yaml", adapter.OpenAPIOptions{
    TagFilter: []string{"pets"},
    ServerURL: "https://api.example.com",
})

gRPC:

adapter.ImportGRPC(s, grpcConn, adapter.GRPCOptions{
    Services: []string{"user.UserService"},
})

コンポーネントのバージョン管理

s.ToolFunc("search", "v1", searchV1, gomcp.Version("1.0"))
s.ToolFunc("search", "v2 with embeddings", searchV2, gomcp.Version("2.0"))
// "search" → latest, "search@1.0" → exact version

非同期タスク

s.AsyncTool("report", "Generate report", func(ctx *gomcp.Context) (*gomcp.CallToolResult, error) {
    // long-running work
    return ctx.Text("done"), nil
})
// Client gets taskId immediately, polls tasks/get, can tasks/cancel

ホットリロード

s.LoadDir("./tools/", gomcp.DirOptions{Watch: true})

MCP Inspector

s.Dev(":9090") // http://localhost:9090 — browse and test all tools

テスト

func TestSearch(t *testing.T) {
    c := mcptest.NewClient(t, setupServer())
    c.Initialize()

    result := c.CallTool("search", map[string]any{"query": "golang"})
    result.AssertNoError(t)
    result.AssertContains(t, "golang")

    mcptest.MatchSnapshot(t, "search_result", result)
}

トランスポート

s.Stdio()          // Claude Desktop, Cursor, Kiro
s.HTTP(":8080")    // Remote deployment with SSE
s.Handler()        // Embed in existing HTTP server

AIクライアントでの使用

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "my-server": {
      "command": "/path/to/your/binary"
    }
  }
}

Claude Desktop、Cursor、Kiro、Windsurf、VS Code Copilot、およびMCP互換のあらゆるクライアントで動作します。

📋 ロードマップ

  • [x] コア: MCPプロトコルを完全サポートしたツール、リソース、プロンプト

  • [x] 構造体タグによる自動スキーマ生成 + パラメーターバリデーション

  • [x] ミドルウェアチェーン (Logger, Recovery, RateLimit, Timeout, RequestID)

  • [x] 認証ミドルウェア (Bearer / API Key / Basic) + RBAC認可

  • [x] プレフィックス命名とネストされたグループを持つツールグループ

  • [x] stdio + SSE通知付きストリーミングHTTPトランスポート

  • [x] Ginアダプター — 既存のGinルートをMCPツールとしてインポート

  • [x] OpenAPIアダプター — Swagger/OpenAPIドキュメントからツールを生成

  • [x] gRPCアダプター — gRPCサービスをMCPツールとしてインポート

  • [x] OpenTelemetry統合

  • [x] スナップショットテスト対応のmcptestパッケージ

  • [x] コンポーネントのバージョン管理 + 非推奨化

  • [x] ポーリングとキャンセル機能付きの非同期タスク

  • [x] MCP Inspector WebデバッグUI

  • [x] YAMLからのホットリロードプロバイダー

  • [x] プロンプト/リソース引数の自動補完

🤝 フィードバック & サポート

💡 推奨読書: How To Ask Questions The Smart Way

🔒 セキュリティ

セキュリティの脆弱性を報告するには、SECURITY.md を参照してください。

⚖️ 著作権 & ライセンス

Copyright © 2026 GoMCP Contributors

Apache License 2.0 の下でライセンスされています。

重要な注意点

  1. 本プロジェクトは、Apache 2.0ライセンスの下で、個人利用および商用利用ともにオープンソースかつ無料です。

  2. ソフトウェアのすべてのコピーまたは実質的な部分において、著作権表示、ライセンス条文、および帰属表示を保持しなければなりません。

  3. Apache 2.0ライセンスには、貢献者からユーザーへの明示的な特許権の付与が含まれています。

  4. 本プロジェクトへの貢献は、同じApache 2.0ライセンスの下でライセンスされます。

  5. 著作権表示の無断削除は、法的措置の対象となる可能性があります。

特許に関する通知

本フレームワークの特定の機能（構造体タグによるスキーマ生成、HTTP-to-MCP自動アダプター、OpenAPI-to-MCP自動アダプター）は、特許出願の対象となっています。Apache 2.0ライセンスは、本ソフトウェアの一部としてこれらの機能を使用するための、永続的、世界的、ロイヤリティフリーの特許ライセンスを付与します。

⭐ Star History

GoMCPが役に立った場合は、ぜひスターを付けてください！他の人がプロジェクトを見つける助けになります。

Available Tools

5 tools
generate_reportC

Generate an analytics report for a given topic. This is a long-running operation that executes asynchronously and may take several minutes. Returns a task ID immediately; poll tasks/get for the result, or call tasks/cancel to abort. Use this for comprehensive data analysis tasks. Demo: short simulated delay (~2s), not multi-minute workload. No persistence of reports in this sample; cancel via tasks/cancel stops the tracked task.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No parameters

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Even without annotations, the description clearly discloses async behavior, immediate task ID return, no persistence, cancellation options, and demo simulation details.

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?

Three sentences covering purpose, async nature, and demo caveat. Efficient but could be slightly more concise.

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?

Covers async behavior and task management, but fails to explain what data the report uses (topic parameter missing) and does not describe return value shape or error scenarios.

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

Parameters2/5

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

The description mentions a 'given topic' but the schema has no parameters. This misalignment reduces the added value; with 100% schema coverage (zero parameters), the description should not imply nonexistent parameters.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states 'Generate an analytics report for a given topic' but the input schema has no parameters, making it unclear how to specify the topic. This contradiction reduces clarity.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description indicates this is a long-running async operation and mentions polling and cancellation. However, it does not explicitly compare to sibling tools or specify 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.

get_configA

Retrieve the current server configuration including version, environment, and feature flags. Use this to inspect server state or verify deployment settings. This is a read-only operation with no side effects. Demo: static JSON only; does not expose real secrets or live infrastructure. Subject to rate limit and timeout; no authentication in this binary.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No parameters

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, description fully discloses read-only nature, no side effects, rate limit, timeout, lack of authentication, and demo limitation (static JSON, no real secrets).

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?

Four sentences, each essential: purpose, usage, read-only statement, and constraints. Front-loaded and efficient.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given zero parameters and no output schema, description covers purpose, use cases, behavior, and constraints fully, leaving no ambiguity.

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?

Zero parameters with 100% schema coverage, baseline 4 per guidelines. No additional parameter info needed.

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?

Clearly states 'Retrieve the current server configuration including version, environment, and feature flags' with specific verb and resource. Differentiates from siblings like generate_report, greet_user, search_documents, and search_semantic.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides explicit use cases: 'inspect server state or verify deployment settings.' Does not explicitly mention when not to use or name alternatives, but context implies appropriate usage.

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

greet_userA

Greet a user by name. Returns a personalized greeting message. If no name is provided, defaults to 'World'. Use this tool to verify server connectivity or welcome a user. Demo server: no authentication; requests are subject to global rate limiting (600 calls/minute) and request timeout (30s). Read-only greeting text output; no writes or external side effects.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No parameters

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool is read-only, has no side effects, and is subject to rate limiting (600 calls/minute) and timeout (30s). However, it contradicts the input schema by mentioning a 'name' parameter that does not exist, which undermines reliability.

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 three concise sentences, front-loading the main purpose and usage. Every sentence adds relevant information without redundancy or filler.

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?

For a tool with zero parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, safety, and constraints. However, the misleading claim about a 'name' parameter reduces completeness and trustworthiness.

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?

The input schema has zero parameters, but the description claims a 'name' parameter defaults to 'World'. This is misleading and adds no value beyond the schema; it introduces confusion about the tool's actual interface.

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 the tool greets a user by name and returns a personalized greeting, which is a specific verb-resource combination. It also mentions verifying server connectivity and welcoming, further clarifying the purpose. The sibling tools (generate_report, get_config, etc.) are unrelated, so differentiation is clear.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly states 'Use this tool to verify server connectivity or welcome a user,' providing clear context for when to use it. It also mentions demo server constraints, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or offer alternatives, though the sibling tools are clearly different.

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

search_documentsA

Search documents by keyword using full-text matching. Returns matching documents ranked by relevance with titles and content snippets. Use this when you need to find documents containing specific words or phrases. For semantic meaning-based search, use search_semantic instead. Demo: mock in-memory results only (no real document store). No auth in this sample; rate limit and timeout apply. On failure, returns an error or empty result set—no destructive operations.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum number of results to return. Use smaller values for quick lookups and larger values for comprehensive searches.
queryYesThe search query string. Supports keywords and phrases to match against document titles and content.

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Discloses mock nature, no auth, rate limits, timeout, and non-destructive behavior despite no annotations.

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?

Concise but informative; key information front-loaded; no redundant sentences.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Explains return values (ranked results with snippets) and failure modes; sufficient for tool's complexity.

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?

Schema covers 100% parameter semantics; description adds no extra detail beyond schema.

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?

Clearly states 'Search documents by keyword using full-text matching' with specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from sibling 'search_semantic'.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly says 'Use this when you need to find documents containing specific words or phrases' and directs to alternative for semantic search.

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

search_semanticA

Search documents using semantic embedding-based matching. Returns results ranked by meaning similarity rather than exact keyword match. Use this when the user's intent matters more than exact wording. For exact keyword matching, use search_documents instead. Demo: simplified mock (no real embeddings API); no auth; same rate limit/timeout as other tools. Read-only; does not modify documents.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum number of results to return. Use smaller values for quick lookups and larger values for comprehensive searches.
queryYesThe search query string. Supports keywords and phrases to match against document titles and content.

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations provided, but the description fully covers behavioral traits: read-only, mock embeddings (demo), no auth, same rate limit/timeout, and does not modify documents.

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?

Well-structured and concise. First sentence states core purpose, then usage guidance, then demo caveats. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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?

Covers purpose, usage, behavioral aspects, and schema. However, without an output schema, the description does not explain return values or result format, which could be helpful for a search tool.

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?

Schema covers both parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds value by explaining the semantic nature, but does not add new parameter-level details beyond schema.

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?

Clearly states semantic embedding-based matching, ranking by meaning similarity, and explicitly distinguishes from exact keyword search, naming the sibling tool search_documents.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly says when to use (user intent matters more than exact wording) and when not (use search_documents instead). Also includes demo context and limitations.

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. 10 tool updatesv0.1.3
    • Addedgenerate_report
    • Addedget_config
    • Addedgreet_user
    • Removedhello
    • Removedreport
    • Addedsearch_documents
    • Addedsearch_semantic
    • Removedsearch.docs
    • Removedsearch@1.0
    • Removedsearch@2.0
  2. 3 tool updatesv0.1.2
    • Changedsearch.docs2 fields changed
      • addedInput schema / properties / limit / description
        Added value: +"Maximum number of results to return. Use smaller values for quick lookups and larger values for comprehensive searches."
      • changedInput schema / properties / query / description
        Previous value: -"Search keyword"New value: +"The search query string. Supports keywords and phrases to match against document titles and content."
    • Changedsearch@1.02 fields changed
      • addedInput schema / properties / limit / description
        Added value: +"Maximum number of results to return. Use smaller values for quick lookups and larger values for comprehensive searches."
      • changedInput schema / properties / query / description
        Previous value: -"Search keyword"New value: +"The search query string. Supports keywords and phrases to match against document titles and content."
    • Changedsearch@2.02 fields changed
      • addedInput schema / properties / limit / description
        Added value: +"Maximum number of results to return. Use smaller values for quick lookups and larger values for comprehensive searches."
      • changedInput schema / properties / query / description
        Previous value: -"Search keyword"New value: +"The search query string. Supports keywords and phrases to match against document titles and content."
  3. 5 tool updatesv0.1.0
    • First observedhello
    • First observedreport
    • First observedsearch.docs
    • First observedsearch@1.0
    • First observedsearch@2.0
Deploy Server
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Scored across 5 tools

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: report generation, config retrieval, greeting, keyword search, and semantic search. The two search tools explicitly differentiate themselves via descriptions and cross-references, eliminating ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools use a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (generate_report, get_config, greet_user, search_documents, search_semantic). The naming is predictable and uniform.

Tool Count5/5

With 5 tools, the server is well-scoped for a lightweight demo/utility server. Each tool serves a distinct function without unnecessary bloat, fitting its apparent purpose.

Completeness2/5

The tool set is a mix of unrelated utilities with notable gaps: generate_report mentions async tasks and task management endpoints (tasks/get, tasks/cancel) but those are not provided as tools. There is no CRUD coverage or coherent domain lifecycle, making the surface incomplete.

Maintenance

ActivitySlowing
ResponsivenessResponsive

Resources

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

  • go-mcp-postgres

    guoling2008
    A
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    what is go-mcp-postgres? go-mcp-postgres is a Model Context Protocol (MCP) server designed for interacting with Postgres databases, allowing for easy CRUD operations and automation without the need for a Node.js or Python environment.
    7
    MIT

  • MCP Hello World

    MillCityAI
    F
    license
    B
    quality
    Not graded
    maintenance
    A minimal reference implementation of an MCP server that responds with "Hello, World" via Streamable HTTP. Serves as a baseline for integration testing and MCP client development with production-ready features including health checks, metrics, and containerized deployment.
    3
    18,765
    -