Decision question and scope
Structured guidance for clear tools, resources and prompts.
The analysis starts with a bounded user task and compares MCP with a direct API or deterministic workflow. A working demonstration is not evidence of production readiness.
Architecture and responsibilities
The assessment identifies the host, one client relationship per server, MCP servers, authorization boundaries and authoritative travel systems. MCP standardizes capability interaction; it does not supply inventory, pricing, order semantics or business authorization.
Assessment dimensions
Each dimension requires an owner, evidence, test date and explicit boundary.
- Name und Zweck
- Ein- und Ausgabeschema
- Vorbedingungen
- Nebenwirkungen und Rechte
- Fehler und Testfälle
Travel case
Aus mehreren Preis- und Verfügbarkeitsendpunkten entsteht ein Tool `revalidate_offer`, das Offer-ID, Zeitpunkt, neue Gesamtsumme und geänderte Bedingungen zurückgibt.
The case is complete only when source provenance, state transitions, permissions, expiry, partial failure and recovery are documented.
Evidence and failure analysis
Required evidence includes versioned contracts, negative authorization and schema tests, authoritative state reconciliation, measurable service objectives and a controlled shutdown path. Registry or publisher metadata alone is not a security or compatibility finding.
Outcome
Am Ende steht ein reviewfähiger Capability-Steckbrief für Architektur, Fachbereich und Security.
The result must state assumptions, unresolved risks and conditions under which MCP is not the appropriate integration choice.
Primary sources and academic context
This page follows the versioned MCP specification and separates normative requirements from architectural recommendations.