Chapter DMCP in codePage 1 of 8

MCP in code

Define the lab goal and success criteria

Define the executable outcome: build an MCP client that connects to a local stdio server, discovers tools, and calls one read-only tool as a bounded, testable system whose behavior does not depend on trusting plausible model output.

~14 minLab goal

1Try it yourself

Playground

Wire MCP in your stack

MCP standardizes tool connections — your app still validates every call.

  1. Run MCP server (tools expose resources)
  2. Register server in client config
  3. List tools from server at runtime
  4. Route model tool call → MCP execute

Before you start

Why this matters

Before coding, write the single observable result this page must add to the previous page. Then name one failure that the implementation must reject. For MCP in code, use the running project—not a toy explanation—as your test: an MCP client that connects to a local stdio server, discovers tools, and calls one read-only tool. Predict what the CLI, test, or HTTP client will observe when the page is complete.

2Learn the idea

Read

Define the executable outcome

Begin with one vertical slice and measurable acceptance criteria. Separate model quality from software correctness: transport, parsing, authorization, and termination must be deterministic even when model content varies. The lab is complete only when a fixture can demonstrate the expected behavior and a negative fixture demonstrates a safe rejection.

Write a README-level contract before installing packages. Record the input, output, owner, latency ceiling, cost ceiling, and stop condition. This prevents an attractive demo from silently becoming an unbounded production promise.

Success has two layers. Software success means the client trusts only configured servers and intersects discovered tools with a local allowlist. Product success means a user receives a useful result without hidden authority or an endless wait. For this lab, the concrete oracle is: The client discovers echo, calls it once, prints “hello”, and closes the transport. Measure fixture pass rate, safe-rejection rate, p95 duration, and external calls per successful task. Do not use “the response looked good” as an acceptance test.

Create src/, test/, .env.example, and package.json. The first deliverable is not a framework; it is a fixture containing representative input, expected structural properties, and prohibited behavior. A useful negative fixture targets startup failure, protocol mismatch, disconnects, changed capabilities, and malformed content blocks. That negative case forces the boundary to exist before provider output can surprise it.

Read

Implementation

export const acceptance = {
  project: "an MCP client that connects to a local stdio server, discovers tools, and calls one read-only tool",
  invariant: "the client trusts only configured servers and intersects discovered tools with a local allowlist",
  expected: "The client discovers echo, calls it once, prints \u201chello\u201d, and closes the transport.",
} as const;

The code is intentionally provider-neutral at the adapter boundary. AI_BASE_URL and model names are environment placeholders, not invented services. If the topic uses MCP, install the current official SDK and verify its exported paths against its release documentation. If a provider offers an official SDK, it can replace fetch inside execute without changing the domain contract. Always inspect the real provider’s documented request and response fields before connecting credentials.

Read

Debug the boundary

Debug from deterministic code outward. First print the parsed configuration with secret values replaced by [set]. Next run the parser against a local fixture. Then run the orchestration with a fake dependency. Only after those pass should you inspect the real boundary. Capture status, content type, request ID, elapsed time, and a redacted response shape. Do not “fix” malformed data with a permissive cast; save it as a failing fixture and decide whether the contract or adapter is wrong.

For this chapter, the fastest diagnostic is to assert that the client trusts only configured servers and intersects discovered tools with a local allowlist. When that assertion fails, stop before downstream work. Expected behavior is concrete: The client discovers echo, calls it once, prints “hello”, and closes the transport. A different but plausible sentence is not enough if the structural and policy checks fail.

Read

Verification notes

  • One positive fixture and one adversarial fixture are written.
  • Success, cost, latency, and stop conditions have numeric targets.
  • Provider variability is separated from deterministic software behavior.
  • Run npm run typecheck and npm test without provider credentials.
  • Record expected terminal behavior beside the fixture so future changes remain reviewable.

A passing test is necessary but does not establish production quality. Review the fixture set for realistic distributions, stale assumptions, tenant boundaries, and expensive edge cases. When outputs are probabilistic, assert schemas, citations, chosen capabilities, stop reasons, and task rubric scores. Reserve exact string assertions for deterministic adapters and protocol framing.

Checking tutor…

Continue learning · glossary & guides
  • Can you point to the executable check proving that the client trusts only configured servers and intersects discovered tools with a local allowlist?
  • Does malformed or unauthorized data stop before external or privileged work?
  • Is the observable success criterion exactly this clear: The client discovers echo, calls it once, prints “hello”, and closes the transport.
  • Glossary: tool · Glossary: structured output · Cheatsheet: production ops signals
  • Next