Skip to main content
Glama
Potato-29

python-mcp-server

by Potato-29
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
Python

python-mcp-server MCP server

A MCP server project

Components

Resources

The server implements a simple note storage system with:

  • Custom note:// URI scheme for accessing individual notes

  • Each note resource has a name, description and text/plain mimetype

Prompts

The server provides a single prompt:

  • summarize-notes: Creates summaries of all stored notes

    • Optional "style" argument to control detail level (brief/detailed)

    • Generates prompt combining all current notes with style preference

Tools

The server implements one tool:

  • add-note: Adds a new note to the server

    • Takes "name" and "content" as required string arguments

    • Updates server state and notifies clients of resource changes

Related MCP server: Beeper MCP Note Server

Configuration

[TODO: Add configuration details specific to your implementation]

Quickstart

Install

Claude Desktop

On MacOS: ~/Library/Application\ Support/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json On Windows: %APPDATA%/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json

Development

Building and Publishing

To prepare the package for distribution:

  1. Sync dependencies and update lockfile:

uv sync

  1. Build package distributions:

uv build

This will create source and wheel distributions in the dist/ directory.

  1. Publish to PyPI:

uv publish

Note: You'll need to set PyPI credentials via environment variables or command flags:

  • Token: --token or UV_PUBLISH_TOKEN

  • Or username/password: --username/UV_PUBLISH_USERNAME and --password/UV_PUBLISH_PASSWORD

Debugging

Since MCP servers run over stdio, debugging can be challenging. For the best debugging experience, we strongly recommend using the MCP Inspector.

You can launch the MCP Inspector via npm with this command:

npx @modelcontextprotocol/inspector uv --directory C:\Prayas\Personal\Projects\python-mcp-server run python-mcp-server

Upon launching, the Inspector will display a URL that you can access in your browser to begin debugging.

Available Tools

2 tools
add-noteC

Add a new note

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
contentYes

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations provided. The description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as idempotency, side effects, or authentication requirements. Only the action is stated.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely short (4 words) and concise. However, it is underspecified for a tool with two parameters and no other documentation, so it does not fully earn its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool has 2 required string parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too minimal. It fails to explain the outcome of the action or any constraints.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the tool description adds no meaning to the two parameters 'name' and 'content'. The agent receives no clarification on their roles or constraints.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Add a new note' clearly states the verb (add) and resource (note), and it distinguishes from sibling tool 'createEvent' which targets a different resource type.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The description only states the action without context.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

createEventC

Create a new Google Calendar event

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
summaryYesThe title/summary of the event
attendeesNoList of attendee email addresses
isFulldayNoIs the event a full day event
descriptionNoOptional description for the event
endDateTimeYesEnd date and time in ISO format (e.g., '2025-07-10T14:30:00Z')
startDateTimeYesStart date and time in ISO format (e.g., '2025-07-10T12:30:00Z')

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior1/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations provided. Description lacks any behavioral disclosure such as authentication requirements, rate limits, side effects, or success/failure behavior for a creation tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Single sentence with no waste. It is front-loaded with the action. Could include more context but remains appropriately concise for a simple tool.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

No output schema, yet the description does not mention return values, event confirmation, or any post-creation behavior. Incomplete for a creation tool with 6 parameters and no annotations.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, with all 6 parameters described in the input schema. However, the description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, staying at the baseline.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states 'Create a new Google Calendar event', which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes from the sibling 'add-note' tool, though not explicitly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use or not use this tool. No mention of prerequisites, restrictions, or comparisons with alternatives like 'add-note'.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. 2 tool updatesv0.1.0
    • First observedadd-note
    • First observedcreateEvent
Install Server
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

The two tools serve completely different domains: notes and calendar events. There is no overlap or confusion possible.

Naming Consistency2/5

Tool names use inconsistent conventions: 'add-note' uses snake_case with hyphen, while 'createEvent' uses camelCase. No consistent pattern.

Tool Count2/5

With only two tools, the server feels underdeveloped for a generic Python MCP server. A more complete set would have at least 5-10 tools to justify its name.

Completeness2/5

The server covers only a single operation each for notes and events. Missing essential operations like list, delete, or update for both domains, leaving significant gaps.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessSyncing

Resources

Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.

Looking for Admin?

If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Potato-29/python-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server