SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

AB mcp-server-building

Design, implement, harden, and verify Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers with precise tool contracts, least-privilege authorization, safe transports, structured errors, and interoperability tests. Use when creating a new MCP server, exposing an API or data source through MCP, reviewing an MCP server design, adding or revising MCP tools, or preparing an MCP server for production.

seb1n/awesome-ai-agent-skills Agent Skills author: seb1n MIT 5 files body ≈ 2 373 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 2 d ago

Design, implement, harden, and verify Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers with precise tool contracts, least-privilege authorization, safe transports…

As a process B 67/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: when it triggers

AnalyzerAI and agentstype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
Runs in: Claude / Claude Code ChatGPT / Codex Gemini CLI Cursor GitHub Copilot / VS Code Qwen Code Kimi Code CLI Z.ai (GLM) DeepSeek (Deep Code) Mistral Vibe LangChain (deepagents) OpenClaw Goose OpenCode
JSON
Technical rating
A
96/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
90
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
B
67/100
Nearly there
When it triggers w 12
20
Failures and branches w 10
50
Tools and files w 18
60
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

    For the model run — optional
    • Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
    • A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.

    Guard findings · 0

    ✓ No critical or high findings

    Files scanned: 5. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

    Against the Agent Skills spec

    • note edit-residue the text marks something as outdated (lines 64, 83, 120): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions

    Process rating: all ten parameters 67/100

    • 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
    • 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
    • 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash, web) that frontmatter does not declare
    • 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
    • 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
    • 85Steps. 39 steps, 1 vague phrases
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2373 tokens
    • 100Running it twice. Mutating operations check current state
    • 100Progress reporting. Reports progress

    Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.

    Quality signals

    • +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
    • +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
    • +4No input/output examples
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +3Description length 383: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 16 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 39 items
    • +3Output format is stated explicitly
    • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (1 of 1)
    • +3All 1 scripts are documented

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 90.