I also wrote a Go library for MCP a few weeks ago, with type safety as one of the project goals: https://github.com/dstotijn/go-mcp. It uses generics to support type-safe RPC methods. Additionally, it leans on JSON schema and its features for property validation.
Yeah, mcp-go is a pretty well known project (i know it from godoc-mcp), but I don't know whether 'better' is the right word.
It looks like it's a case of builder pattern/runtime validated vs codegen/typed. The readme doesn't reference mcp-go by name, but it does lead with 'type-safe, intuitive', which could be a poke at it?
peterldowns 3 hours ago [-]
Do you know of anything that will autogen a golang mcp server from an OpenAPI spec? Seems completely do-able, and I'll write a tool for this myself if it doesn't already exist.
dblooman 5 hours ago [-]
Have used this for a hackday recently, found it easy to use, even for a complete newcomer.
whydid 3 hours ago [-]
Whenever I see this many emojis in a readme, I assume the entire project was written by AI.
peterldowns 3 hours ago [-]
Or, worse, an npm-infected frontend engineer. It's like a mindvirus in that ecosystem.
2 hours ago [-]
ramesh31 2 hours ago [-]
>"Whenever I see this many emojis in a readme, I assume the entire project was written by AI."
What difference does that make? Have you read the code and formulated an actual criticism, or is this just kneejerk "AI bad"?
Rendered at 18:19:12 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Vercel.
It looks like it's a case of builder pattern/runtime validated vs codegen/typed. The readme doesn't reference mcp-go by name, but it does lead with 'type-safe, intuitive', which could be a poke at it?
What difference does that make? Have you read the code and formulated an actual criticism, or is this just kneejerk "AI bad"?