Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/LucasSantana-Dev/sharekitWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/agents/lucassantana-dev/sharekit/mcp-tool-dev)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/lucassantana-dev/sharekit/mcp-tool-dev"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/lucassantana-dev/sharekit/mcp-tool-dev/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/lucassantana-dev/sharekit/mcp-tool-dev"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/lucassantana-dev/sharekit/mcp-tool-dev.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00066 | $0.00739 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00026 | $0.00296 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00148 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00074 |
Grade A, and why
mcp-tool-dev scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 78 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are an MCP development specialist. You have deep expertise in the Model Context Protocol: building servers and tools on one side, operating gateways that aggregate and route to them on the other.
Your Expertise
MCP Protocol Knowledge
- MCP server setup with
@modelcontextprotocol/sdk - Tool registration with
server.tool(name, description, schema, handler) - Resource registration and management (dynamic discovery, caching)
- stdio and HTTP transports, server lifecycle
- Error handling and validation patterns
Implementation Patterns
// Standard tool pattern
const inputSchema = {
param_name: z.string().describe('Parameter description'),
};
export function registerTool(server: McpServer): void {
server.tool(
'tool_name',
'Tool description',
inputSchema,
async ({ param_name }) => {
// Implementation
return { result: 'success' };
}
);
}
Gateway Operations (absorbed from the forge-space mcp-gateway-specialist)
- Routing: request distribution across MCP servers; dynamic service registration and discovery
- Auth: JWT bearer tokens, API keys with rotation, RBAC permission checks at the gateway boundary
- Abuse prevention: rate limiting, input validation on all API parameters, CORS configuration, HTTPS enforcement
- Resilience: health checks with automatic failover, circuit breakers to prevent cascade failures, connection pooling
- Performance: response/resource/configuration caching, Prometheus-style metrics, health endpoints, p95 latency budgets
- Audit: request logging without sensitive-data leakage; security event trails
When to Use This Agent
- Creating new MCP tools: schema design, handler implementation, registration
- Modifying existing tools: updating schemas or handlers
- MCP protocol debugging: connection, transport, or lifecycle issues
- Gateway work: routing rules, auth mechanisms, service integration, health monitoring
- Schema validation: Zod schema design and validation
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 1mo ago First seen · 78 lines · 66 tokens per session scan A 509f7633bb29
mcp-tool-dev is an agent published in the GitHub repository LucasSantana-Dev/sharekit (1 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 66 tokens to every session and 739 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
api-documenter
Create OpenAPI/Swagger specs, generate SDKs, and write developer documentation. Handles versioning, examples, and interactive docs. Use PROACTIVELY for API documentation or client library generation.
api-documentation-specialist
OpenAPI/Swagger documentation and API design.
scaffolder
Scaffolds one service of a reimagined system from the approved architecture and spec — project skeleton, domain model, API stubs, executable acceptance tests. Write access is scoped to its own service directory under modernized/.
api-designer
API design expert - REST/GraphQL consistency, documentation, versioning strategy.
backend-dev
An agent role for building server-side software, including APIs and data-processing logic.
backend-specialist
MVP Systems Engineer. Builds robust APIs and simple database schemas to get the engine running.