Loading ToolBench
MCP server for Gin application that converts Gin routes into MCP tools
gin-mcp exposes 5 tools with significant quality gaps. Tools are registered via server.go, but most lack proper input schemas and have generic or missing descriptions. The 'tools/call' tool is a passthrough that exposes arbitrary Gin routes with dynamic parameters, creating a high-risk gateway pattern. 'logging/setLevel' should not be exposed as a tool, it's a server control plane concern, not a user-facing capability. Parameter descriptions are minimal or absent. Output schemas are not documented. Error handling is not visible in the provided code. No tool annotation hints (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint) are present.
Initialize the MCP connection and get server information
Set the logging level for the MCP server
Discover server capabilities and metadata
Execute a tool by calling the underlying Gin route handler
List all available tools provided by the MCP server
tools/call is a high-risk passthrough gateway that exposes ANY Gin route to agents with no parameter validation, permission gating, or error recovery guidance. Parameters are typed but completely undescribed ('operationID', 'parameters: object'). No tool annotation hints (destructiveHint, readOnlyHint). This violates the tool-gateway and permission-gate patterns.
logging/setLevel should not be exposed as a tool. Server control plane concerns (logging, configuration, initialization) should not be agent-facing capabilities. Agents do not need to set log levels, operators do. This violates single-responsibility and chat-data-model patterns.
5 of 5 tools lack documented output schemas. Agents cannot reason about downstream tool chaining or extract necessary fields. For example, tools/list should document the structure of returned Tool objects (name, description, inputSchema fields). This violates the response-shaper and tool-chain patterns.
Inferred effective spec: 2026-07-28+.
| Scored | Grade | Overall | Spec posture | Rubric |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-09-22 | F | 39 | 2026-07-28+ | v2 |
| 2026-03-09 | F | 41 | - | v1 |
All tool descriptions are 20-35 characters and generic. None follow the pattern of 'WHAT it does, WHEN to use it, WHAT it returns.' Example: 'tools/list' should say 'Lists all MCP tools available from this server. Call this first to see what capabilities are exposed, or to find the operation ID needed for tools/call. Returns an array of Tool objects with name, description, and input schema.'
No error handling guidance visible in tool definitions. If tools/call receives an invalid operationID or malformed parameters, there is no recovery hint for agents. Per pattern:recovery-guide, error responses must guide the LLM: 'Invalid operation ID. Try tools/list to see available operations.'
initialize is an anti-pattern. Per MCP spec 2026-07-28 (stateless), there is no initialize handshake, each request is self-contained and carries protocol version + capabilities in _meta. Advertising an 'initialize' tool conflates old session-based semantics with the new stateless model.
tools/call and tools/list lack tool annotation hints. Per MCP spec 2026-07-28, tools should declare readOnlyHint (e.g., tools/list is read-only), destructiveHint (tools/call could be destructive depending on target operation), and idempotentHint. Annotations help agents reason about side effects.