Jumpstart Model Context Protocol (MCP) development with this production-ready TypeScript template. Build robust MCP servers and clients with built-in utilities, authentication, and service integrations. Agent framework utilizing MCP Client included.
This server has 3 tools with minimal but present descriptions and basic schemas. However, the naming is inconsistent (mixing verbs like 'echo', 'fetch', 'fetch'), parameter descriptions are sparse or missing, and output schemas are not documented. Tool names lack clarity about what distinguishes similar tools (echo_message vs fetch_cat_fact vs fetch_image_test). No tool annotations, limited error handling guidance, and no evidence of idempotency or composition support. The server follows a basic template structure but falls well short of production-grade tool definition quality. Most tools are simple read-only operations with trivial purposes (echo, cat facts, image test), which limits their real-world utility and sophistication.
Echo tool that repeats the input message back to the user
Fetches a random cat fact from an external API
Test tool for fetching and processing images
Tool naming lacks action-verb clarity and domain specificity. 'echo_message' is generic; 'fetch_cat_fact' and 'fetch_image_test' use the same verb but serve unrelated purposes. LLMs cannot easily distinguish tools based on names alone.
Output schemas are not documented. Users cannot understand what fields each tool returns, what their types are, or how to chain tools together. This violates the fundamental pattern that LLMs need to know the shape of tool outputs to plan subsequent calls.
Parameter descriptions are minimal or absent. 'fetch_cat_fact' has no input parameters but no explanation of what it does or when to call it. 'fetch_image_test' only documents the URL parameter; no guidance on expected format, accepted image types, or return structure.
Inferred effective spec: <=2025-11-25.
| Scored | Grade | Overall | Spec posture | Rubric |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-09-22 | F | 46 | <=2025-11-25 | v2 |
| 2026-03-09 | F | 27 | 2025-03-26+ | v1 |
No tool annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint). While all three tools are marked READ_ONLY in risk assessment, this is not exposed in tool metadata where agents can see it. Agents cannot infer whether a tool is safe to retry or if it modifies state.
No error handling guidance. If fetch_cat_fact fails due to API unavailability, or fetch_image_test fails due to a malformed URL, what should the agent do next? No recovery hints, categorization, or actionable error messages documented.
Tool composition is unclear. 'echo_message' serves no practical purpose in an agent workflow. 'fetch_cat_fact' returns random facts with no context about when to call it. 'fetch_image_test' is a test tool. These do not form a coherent, composable toolset.