Start / Skills / Entwickler-Produktivität / MCP-Baukasten MCP Builder
Entwickler-Produktivität

MCP-Baukasten MCP Builder

AnthropicApache-2.0Sprache des Skills: Englisch
Lizenz geprüftEnthält SkripteExterner Dienst nötigZugangsdaten nötig
DemoEchter Lauf · claude-sonnet-5-5 · Oktober 2026
I want to build an MCP server for a weather forecast REST API. Plan the tool design for me: server name, tool names, input parameters, pagination and error handling. Give me the plan, not the full code.
Skill: mcp-builder

Weather Forecast MCP Server: Tool Design Plan

I haven't seen your API's docs, so this assumes a typical weather REST API with geocoding, current conditions, hourly and daily forecasts, and alerts. Send me the real endpoints and I'll adjust the plan.

1. Server basics

Item Choice
Server name weather-mcp-server (TypeScript convention: {service}-mcp-server; Python would be weather_mcp)
Language TypeScript with the MCP SDK and Zod
Transport stdio for local use. Use stateless JSON streamable HTTP if you host it remotely.
Auth API key from an env var (WEATHER_API_KEY). It never appears as a tool parameter.
Tool prefix weather_ on every tool, so they stay discoverable next to other servers

2. Tools

All tools are read-only, so each gets the annotations readOnlyHint: true, destructiveHint: false, idempotentHint: true, openWorldHint: true.

weather_search_locations

Resolves a place name to coordinates. Forecast tools depend on this, since LLMs are bad at guessing lat/lon.

  • query (string, 2–100 chars): e.g. "Paris" or "Portland, Oregon".
  • country_code (optional string, ISO-3166 alpha-2): disambiguates results.
  • limit (int, 1–50, default 10) and offset (int, default 0).
  • Returns: location_id, name, admin_region, country, latitude, longitude, timezone, plus pagination metadata.

weather_get_current_conditions

  • location: a shared location input (see below).
  • units: metric or imperial (default metric).
  • response_format: markdown or json (default markdown).
  • Returns: temperature, feels-like, humidity, wind speed and direction, precipitation, condition text, observation time and the location's timezone.

weather_get_hourly_forecast

  • location, units and response_format, as above.
  • start_hour_offset (int, default 0) and limit (int, 1–48, default 24). These act as the pagination window.
  • fields (optional enum array, e.g. temperature, precipitation_probability, wind). This trims the output, since hourly data is large.

weather_get_daily_forecast

  • location, units and response_format, as above.
  • days (int, 1–16, default 7), with offset for paging past the first window if the API supports it.
  • Returns: high/low, precipitation total and probability, wind, UV index, sunrise/sunset, and a condition summary.

weather_get_alerts

  • location.
  • severity (optional enum: minor, moderate, severe, extreme).
  • limit and offset.
  • Returns: event, severity, onset/expiry, affected area, and description. An empty list is a valid result, reported as "no active alerts".

Optional, if the API supports them

  • weather_get_historical_weather: location, start_date and end_date (ISO YYYY-MM-DD, with a max range), plus limit and offset.
  • weather_get_air_quality: AQI and pollutants.

Shared location input

Every forecast tool accepts one of two forms, validated with a Zod union:

  • { latitude: number (-90..90), longitude: number (-180..180) }
  • { location_id: string } from weather_search_locations

I'd also consider letting forecast tools take a plain place_name and geocode internally. That saves the model a round trip, but it can silently pick the wrong "Springfield", so the response would have to echo the resolved place. My recommendation is to require explicit coordinates or an ID, because ambiguity is the most common failure here.

3. Pagination

Most weather data is small, so pagination only matters for location search, alerts, hourly data and history.

  • Style: limit plus offset as inputs, even if the upstream API uses cursors or page numbers. The server translates between them. If the API is cursor-only, return an opaque next_cursor instead.
  • Defaults: keep them small (10 for search, 24 hours for hourly) and enforce hard maximums in the schema.
  • Response metadata, included in both text and structuredContent:
    { "total": 87, "count": 20, "offset": 0, "has_more": true, "next_offset": 20 }
    
  • Truncation: cap output at about 25k characters. If exceeded, cut the result and add a note like "Truncated; use limit/fields or a smaller range."

4. Error handling

Errors are returned as tool results with isError: true, not as protocol errors. Each message should say what happened and what to do next.

Upstream condition Message to the model
400 / invalid params "Invalid latitude 123. Must be between -90 and 90."
401 / 403 "API key missing or rejected. Check WEATHER_API_KEY on the server." This one is for the user, so don't tell the model to retry.
404 / no location found "No location matched 'Xyzzy'. Try weather_search_locations with a broader query or a country_code."
429 "Rate limited. Retry after N seconds." (taken from the Retry-After header)
5xx / timeout / network "Weather service temporarily unavailable. Retry shortly."
Empty result A normal success: "No alerts active for this location."

Implementation notes:

  • Use one shared handleApiError() helper that maps status codes to these messages. Never leak raw stack traces or the API key.
  • Use a request timeout (about 10s). Retry once on 5xx or network errors with a short backoff, and never retry 4xx.
  • Add a small in-memory cache (TTL of about 5–10 minutes for forecasts, 24 hours for geocoding) to cut rate-limit pressure.
  • Validate inputs with Zod .strict() schemas, so bad inputs fail before any HTTP call.

5. Output conventions

  • Each tool defines an outputSchema and returns structuredContent, plus a text rendering in the requested response_format.
  • Always include units and the location's timezone in output, because "18°" and "3 pm" are ambiguous without them.
  • Markdown output is human-readable (dates and place names, not raw IDs). JSON output is complete and meant for programmatic use.

6. Suggested project layout

weather-mcp-server/
├── src/
│   ├── index.ts            # server init, transport
│   ├── constants.ts        # base URL, CHARACTER_LIMIT, defaults
│   ├── schemas/            # shared Zod: location, units, pagination
│   ├── services/
│   │   └── weatherClient.ts  # HTTP, auth, retry, cache, handleApiError
│   ├── formatters.ts       # markdown/json rendering, truncation
│   └── tools/              # one file per tool group
└── package.json, tsconfig.json

7. Next steps

  1. Send me the API docs or the name of the provider, and I'll finalize the tool list and field mappings.
  2. Build the API client and shared helpers first, then the tools.
  3. Test with npx @modelcontextprotocol/inspector.
  4. Write about 10 read-only evaluation questions, such as "Which of Lisbon or Madrid has the higher forecast high on Friday?", to check that a model can chain search_locations into a forecast tool.

Questions that would change the plan:

  • Which weather provider are you using?
  • Is this server local or remote?
  • Do you need history or air quality, or just forecasts and alerts?

Real run recorded with claude-code / claude-sonnet-5-5. Output is shown verbatim, unmodified.

Was es tut

Führt das Modell durch den Bau eines MCP-Servers (Model Context Protocol), über den ein KI-Agent mit einem externen Dienst arbeiten kann, und zwar mit gut gestalteten Tools. Es enthält praxiserprobte Konventionen: wie Server und Tools benannt werden, wann JSON und Markdown als Ausgabe angeboten werden, wie paginiert wird, wie Fehlermeldungen dem Agenten den nächsten Schritt nennen und wie der Transport gewählt wird.

So funktioniert es

  1. Recherche und Planung: MCP-Spezifikation und SDK-Dokumentation lesen, Tools auswählen und eine breite API-Abdeckung planen.
  2. Umsetzung: Projekt, gemeinsamen API-Client und Fehlerbehandlung aufsetzen, dann jedes Tool mit typisierten Eingabeschemas (Zod oder Pydantic) und Annotationen registrieren.
  3. Prüfung und Test: Codequalität prüfen, bauen und den Server im MCP Inspector ausprobieren.
  4. Evaluierung: etwa 10 realistische, rein lesende, überprüfbare Fragen schreiben, um zu testen, ob ein Modell Ihre Tools wirklich nutzen kann. Zwei mitgelieferte Python-Skripte können diese Evaluierung gegen Ihren Server ausführen.

Geeignet für: Entwickler, die einen MCP-Server für eine REST-API oder ein SaaS-Produkt bauen, in TypeScript (empfohlen) oder Python.

Hinweise & Risiken

Anweisungen, Referenzleitfäden und 2 Python-Skripte (scripts/connections.py, scripts/evaluation.py), die wir Zeile für Zeile gelesen haben; verborgenes Verhalten fanden wir nicht. Für evaluation.py brauchen Sie Ihren eigenen Anthropic-API-Schlüssel (aus ANTHROPIC_API_KEY) und es entstehen kostenpflichtige API-Aufrufe; im stdio-Modus startet es den von Ihnen angegebenen Serverbefehl. Kann Ihr Agent ins Web, weist das Skill das Modell außerdem an, MCP-Spezifikation und SDK-Dokumentation abzurufen. Die Codebeispiele dienen als Vorlage und sollten vor der Nutzung geprüft werden (das Beispiel für Dateiressourcen validiert etwa keine Pfade).