Skip to main content
Glama
vedangps

NitroStack Hackathon Starter

by vedangps

NitroStack × Amrita Hackathon Starter

A verified, event-ready base for building a TypeScript MCP server with the official NitroStack SDK. The included calculator module is a working reference, not the final hackathon idea.

Live deployment

The service runs MCP protocol 2025-06-18. A live smoke test initializes the server, lists both tools, and executes 5 + 3 = 8.

Related MCP server: NitroStack Calculator MCP Server

Ready on this laptop

  • Node.js 20.18.1 and npm 10.8.2

  • Git and GitHub CLI

  • VS Code

  • NitroStudio 1.4.14

  • Official NitroStack CLI 1.0.15 installed globally

  • Official typescript-starter template

  • Root and widget dependencies installed

  • Local build, preflight checks, and GitHub Actions CI

  • Idea, build, security, submission, and three-minute demo templates

Start here

  1. Complete the short account checklist.

  2. Fill in the one-page idea brief with your team.

  3. Replace the calculator example with the smallest end-to-end version of your chosen idea.

  4. Run:

    npm run dev
  5. In NitroStudio, choose Add Server → Nitro Project, select this folder, and open Studio App Canvas.

Before every push:

npm run check

Project map

src/
├── index.ts
├── app.module.ts
├── health/
├── modules/
│   └── calculator/        # Replace with your MVP module
└── widgets/
    └── app/
docs/
├── IDEA.md
├── BUILD_PLAN.md
├── MANUAL_ACCOUNT_STEPS.md
├── PIZZA_REFERENCE_WORKFLOW.md
├── SUBMISSION_CHECKLIST.md
└── DEMO_SCRIPT.md
scripts/
└── preflight.mjs

Commands

Command

Purpose

npm run dev

Start the MCP server and widget dev server

npm run build

Build the production bundle

npm run check

Build, exercise the MCP server, and run preflight checks

npm run smoke:mcp

List and call MCP primitives through STDIO

npm run audit:all

Audit server and widget dependency trees

npm run start:prod

Run the built production server

npm run upgrade

Upgrade NitroStack packages

Non-negotiable event rules

  • Use the official NitroStack TypeScript SDK throughout the project.

  • Align the idea with an organizer-approved track.

  • Keep main working and deployable.

  • Deploy early to NitroCloud and test the live service after major changes.

  • Never commit .env, API keys, tokens, passwords, credentials, private keys, node_modules, or large binaries.

  • Keep the repository public through judging.

  • Submit the live NitroCloud deployment, complete GitHub repository, and a demo video no longer than three minutes through the organizer-provided account.

See SUBMISSION_CHECKLIST.md for the full gate.

Available Tools

2 tools
calculateC

Perform basic arithmetic calculations

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
aYesFirst number
bYesSecond number
operationYesThe operation to perform

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention edge cases (e.g., division by zero), return format, or any side effects. The description is purely functional and lacks transparency about behavior beyond the operation itself.

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?

The description is a single short sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately minimal for a simple tool, though it could have included behavioral details without harming conciseness.

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?

The tool is simple, but the description omits crucial context such as the return value and edge-case behavior. Since there is no output schema, the description should explain what the caller receives, and it does not. The absence of warnings about division by zero or other pitfalls makes it incomplete.

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 description coverage is 100%, with all three parameters (a, b, operation) already described in the schema. The description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description 'Perform basic arithmetic calculations' clearly states the tool's function with a specific verb and resource. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling convert_temperature by focusing on arithmetic rather than conversion, though it does not explicitly name the operations.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like convert_temperature. There are no explicit use cases, exclusions, or context hints beyond the tool name, leaving the agent to infer applicability.

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

convert_temperatureB

Convert temperature units based on file content or direct input. Supports Celsius (C) and Fahrenheit (F).

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
valueNoTemperature value to convert
to_unitNoUnit to convert to (C or F)
file_nameYesName of the uploaded file
file_typeYesMIME type of the uploaded file
from_unitNoUnit to convert from (C or F)
file_contentYesBase64 encoded file content. Will be injected by system.

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not disclose the return format, whether it modifies state, the relationship between file content and direct input, or any prerequisites. The phrase 'based on file content or direct input' is ambiguous without explaining precedence or requirements given the schema's required file parameters.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is two sentences, front-loads the primary action, and contains no redundant or filler content. Every phrase adds information about the tool's scope.

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?

The tool has six parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description does not explain the required file parameters, how to invoke the tool correctly, or what the return value is, leaving significant gaps for a tool with this complexity.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds the concept of 'file content or direct input', which provides some context beyond the schema, but it does not clarify parameter combinations or precedence, so it does not meaningfully exceed the baseline.

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 clearly states the verb 'convert' and the resource 'temperature units', specifically supporting Celsius and Fahrenheit. It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'calculate' by specifying the domain of temperature conversion.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage for temperature conversion but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over 'calculate' or provide exclusions. It mentions 'based on file content or direct input' as usage context but lacks explicit guidance on choosing between the two input modes or alternative tools.

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 updatesv1.0.0
    • First observedcalculate
    • First observedconvert_temperature

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: one handles general arithmetic and the other handles temperature conversion. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them, so an agent can easily select the correct tool.

Naming Consistency5/5

Both tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern: 'calculate' and 'convert_temperature'. Both use lowercase with underscores, maintaining a predictable naming convention across the set.

Tool Count3/5

With only two tools, the server feels very thin for a 'Hackathon Starter' name, which suggests a broader utility toolkit. This makes the count borderline, though it is still functional for basic needs.

Completeness2/5

The server appears to aim at providing math utilities, but it only offers basic arithmetic and temperature conversion. There are significant gaps such as length/weight conversions, currency conversion, or more advanced math functions, leaving the surface severely incomplete for a general-purpose starter kit.

Maintenance

ActivitySlowing
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

  • F
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    C
    maintenance
    A minimal MCP server template for learning NitroStack fundamentals, featuring a calculator module with tools, resources, and prompts.
    -
  • F
    license
    C
    quality
    C
    maintenance
    A minimal MCP server template for learning NitroStack fundamentals, featuring a calculator module with tools, resources, and prompts.
    9
    -
  • A
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    C
    maintenance
    This template enables learning NitroStack fundamentals with a calculator-focused MCP server that supports tools, resources, and prompts. It includes TypeScript and Zod validation for building MCP servers.
    225
    1
    MIT

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/vedangps/nitrostack-hackathon-starter'

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