flask-mcp-plus has critically inadequate tool definitions. Only 2 tools are defined: 'hello_world' and 'add'. Both have minimal descriptions ('hello world' and 'add' respectively, totaling 5 and 3 characters, far below the 10-character minimum baseline of 34 chars p10). Tool naming is not action-oriented (hello_world lacks clarity on what it does; 'add' is a math operation with no context on when to use it). Schemas are present but sparse, the 'add' tool correctly declares integer parameters a and b as required, but lacks descriptions for these parameters. The 'hello_world' tool has an empty parameter schema with no description of what it returns. No error handling, no output documentation, and no recovery guidance are visible. The codebase shows HTTP transport via Flask, which is acceptable, but the actual tool definitions are severely underdeveloped for production use. Framework is 'custom' (hand-rolled Flask integration), not a mature MCP SDK.
add
hello world
Tool descriptions are critically inadequate (3-5 chars, well below 10-char minimum). 'hello world' and 'add' provide zero actionable context for LLM tool selection.
Tool naming lacks action verbs and semantic clarity. 'hello_world' does not indicate what happens; 'add' is generic without context (math function? list appender? aggregator?). LLMs cannot infer intent from names alone.
Parameter descriptions are missing entirely. The 'add' tool declares parameters 'a' and 'b' as integers but does not describe what they represent, their valid ranges, or units. The 'hello_world' tool has no input parameters documented.
Output schemas are not documented. Callers cannot determine what 'hello_world' or 'add' return (data type, fields, structure). LLMs cannot plan downstream use without output documentation.
| Scored | Grade | Overall | Spec posture | Rubric |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-09-22 | F | 32 | 2025-06-18+ | v2 |
| 2026-03-09 | F | 26 | 2025-06-18+ | v1 |
No error handling or recovery guidance visible. If 'add' receives non-integer input or out-of-range values, no error classification or remediation path is provided.
Tool composition is trivial and underdeveloped. Only 2 example tools with no multi-step workflows, chaining references, or realistic use cases. A production MCP server should expose 5+ well-defined domain tools.