mcp-builder
Build high-quality MCP (Model Context Protocol) servers that let LLMs interact with external services through well-designed tools. Use when creating MCP servers to integrate APIs or services in Python (FastMCP) or Node/TypeScript (MCP SDK).
79
73%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.agents/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 description that clearly identifies its niche (MCP server development) and provides explicit trigger guidance with framework-specific terms. Its main weakness is that the 'what' portion could be more specific about the concrete actions involved (e.g., defining tools, resources, prompts, configuring transports). The trigger terms are excellent with good coverage of both the protocol name and specific framework names.
Suggestions
Add more specific concrete actions like 'define tools, resources, and prompts' or 'configure server transports' to improve specificity beyond the general 'build servers' framing.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (MCP servers) and mentions some actions ('Build', 'interact with external services', 'integrate APIs or services'), but doesn't list multiple specific concrete actions like defining tools, handling requests, configuring transports, etc. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (build MCP servers that let LLMs interact with external services through well-designed tools) and 'when' (explicit 'Use when creating MCP servers to integrate APIs or services in Python (FastMCP) or Node/TypeScript (MCP SDK)'). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural keywords users would say: 'MCP', 'Model Context Protocol', 'MCP servers', 'FastMCP', 'MCP SDK', 'Python', 'Node', 'TypeScript', 'APIs', 'LLMs', 'tools'. Good coverage of terms and framework names. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | MCP server development is a very specific niche with distinct triggers (MCP, Model Context Protocol, FastMCP, MCP SDK). Unlikely to conflict with general API or coding skills due to the specificity of the protocol. | 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 skill that effectively organizes a complex multi-phase workflow with good progressive disclosure to reference materials. Its main weaknesses are the lack of concrete executable examples in the main file (relying heavily on referenced guides) and some redundancy between the workflow sections and the reference files summary at the bottom. Adding validation feedback loops and at least one minimal working code example would significantly improve it.
Suggestions
Add at least one minimal but complete executable code example (e.g., a 10-line TypeScript MCP server with one tool) directly in the main skill file to improve actionability.
Remove or consolidate the 'Reference Files' section at the bottom, as it largely duplicates links and descriptions already provided inline during the workflow phases.
Add explicit validation feedback loops in Phase 3 (e.g., 'If build fails: check error output, fix issues, rebuild. If Inspector test fails: review tool descriptions and schemas, fix, re-test').
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is reasonably organized but includes some unnecessary elaboration that Claude already knows (e.g., explaining what DRY principle means, explaining why TypeScript is recommended with justifications about static typing). The reference files section at the bottom largely duplicates links and descriptions already provided in the main workflow, adding redundant tokens. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides a structured process with specific URLs, tool names, and framework recommendations, but lacks executable code examples. Implementation guidance is largely descriptive ('Create shared utilities', 'Use Zod or Pydantic') rather than providing concrete, copy-paste-ready code snippets. It delegates most concrete details to reference files. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The four-phase workflow is clearly sequenced and logically organized. However, validation checkpoints are weak—Phase 3 mentions building and testing but lacks explicit feedback loops (e.g., what to do if build fails, how to iterate on tool quality). For a skill involving complex multi-step server development, the absence of clear validate-fix-retry loops is a gap. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill effectively uses progressive disclosure with a clear overview in the main file and well-signaled, one-level-deep references to language-specific guides, best practices, evaluation guide, and SDK documentation. Navigation is easy with descriptive links and emoji markers indicating content type. | 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.
- Repository
- warpdotdev/oz-skills
- Commit
6c08c49
- Reviewed
Table of Contents
Is this your skill?
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.