Guide for creating high-quality MCP (Model Context Protocol) servers that enable LLMs to interact with external services through well-designed tools. Use when building MCP servers to integrate external APIs or services, whether in Python (FastMCP), Node/TypeScript (MCP SDK), or C#/.NET (Microsoft MCP SDK).
83
73%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
100%
2.50xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.github/skills/mcp-builder/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
89%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is a solid skill description with excellent trigger term coverage across multiple programming languages and SDKs, and it clearly states both what the skill does and when to use it. The main weakness is that the 'what' portion is somewhat high-level—it describes the goal (creating MCP servers) but doesn't enumerate specific concrete actions or sub-tasks the skill covers. The distinctiveness is strong due to the niche domain.
Suggestions
Add more specific concrete actions to improve specificity, e.g., 'define tool schemas, handle authentication, implement request validation, structure server endpoints, configure transport layers'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description names the domain (MCP servers) and a general action ('creating high-quality MCP servers that enable LLMs to interact with external services through well-designed tools'), but it doesn't list multiple specific concrete actions like 'define tool schemas, handle authentication, implement error handling, register endpoints'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (creating MCP servers that enable LLMs to interact with external services through well-designed tools) and 'when' (explicit 'Use when building MCP servers to integrate external APIs or services' with language-specific triggers). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural keywords users would say: 'MCP', 'Model Context Protocol', 'MCP servers', 'external APIs', 'services', 'Python', 'FastMCP', 'Node', 'TypeScript', 'MCP SDK', 'C#', '.NET', 'Microsoft MCP SDK'. Good coverage of language-specific variations and the core protocol name. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | MCP server development is a very specific niche. The description includes distinct triggers like 'MCP', 'Model Context Protocol', 'FastMCP', and specific SDK names that are unlikely to conflict with other skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
57%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-structured orchestration document that effectively organizes a complex multi-language, multi-phase MCP server development process with excellent progressive disclosure to reference files. Its main weaknesses are moderate verbosity (especially the duplicated reference listing and lengthy Microsoft ecosystem section) and limited actionability in the main body—most concrete, executable guidance is deferred to reference files rather than provided inline. Validation and error-recovery steps in the workflow could be more explicit.
Suggestions
Add at least one minimal but complete executable code example (e.g., a 10-line TypeScript or Python MCP server) directly in the main body to improve actionability without requiring reference file loading.
Add explicit validation checkpoints with feedback loops in Phase 2 and Phase 3 (e.g., 'If build fails: check X, fix Y, rebuild' or 'Validate tool descriptions by running inspector and confirming tool list matches plan').
Consolidate the Reference Files section at the bottom with the inline references in the phases—the current duplication adds ~40 lines of redundant content that could be eliminated to improve conciseness.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is moderately efficient but includes some unnecessary verbosity—e.g., the Microsoft MCP ecosystem section is quite lengthy for an overview document, and the Reference Files section at the bottom largely duplicates information already presented in the workflow phases. Some tables and descriptions could be tightened. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides structured guidance with specific tool names, SDK references, and commands (e.g., `npm run build`, `npx @modelcontextprotocol/inspector`), but lacks executable code examples in the main body. Most implementation details are deferred to reference files, and the core content reads more like a checklist than copy-paste-ready instructions. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The four-phase workflow is clearly sequenced and logically organized, but validation checkpoints are weak—Phase 3 mentions 'review' and 'build and test' but lacks explicit feedback loops (e.g., what to do if build fails, how to validate tool descriptions work correctly). For a process involving server implementation and deployment, more explicit validation gates would be expected. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill excels at progressive disclosure with a clear overview structure that points to well-signaled, one-level-deep reference files (Python guide, TypeScript guide, Microsoft MCP patterns, evaluation guide, best practices). References are contextually placed at the point of need within each phase, and the Reference Files section provides a comprehensive index with descriptions of what each file contains. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |
Validation
100%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
325091f
Table of Contents
If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.