What Flows just did
Based on your request to build Build Your First MCP Server, Flows created 4 implementation stages and 12 checks.
You asked for: Build an MCP server with 2-3 real tools, connect it to a host/client, and verify discovery, invocation, and error behavior end to end.. Flows generated 4 stages because the application requires An MCP server exposing 2-3 genuinely useful tools with typed schemas; Correct protocol lifecycle: initialization, tool listing, tool calls; Meaningful tool results and structured errors over the protocol. Each stage tells your AI builder what to do, tests whether it actually worked, and gives a repair instruction when it fails. These checks are designed to catch: Hand-rolled protocol handling that breaks on the first spec nuance; Tools that work in isolation but fail through the host's serialization; Errors thrown as exceptions that kill the server instead of error results.
Example failure
The form reported success, but no database record was created.
What Flows does
Flows detects the failure, generates a repair instruction, reruns the test, and stores the passing evidence.
Stages — Plan → Build → Test → Fix → Prove → Ship
4 stages · 12 checks · progressive disclosure — open a stage for details
Copy to external builder
Copies a prompt for Claude/Cursor/etc. Records prompt_copied only — not execution, commits, or checks.
Execute through Oort
Requires Sign in with Oort + a provider connection (BYOK). Keys stay on Oort. A model name in the dropdown is not the same as a live connection.
Next
Check off: Tools are useful, bounded, and schema-tight
Add a proof note on each check — a checkbox alone is weak proof.
Probes & advanced tools are under “More verification tools”. Experience level: Settings.
Project (saved with proof)
Project binding: Unbound — complete project binding before trusting this run · missing repositoryUrl, repositoryStartCommit, environment, stack
More verification tools (probes, timeline, adapters)Show
App persistence (create → read → assert token)
Body template: {"probe":"{{token}}","title":"flows-probe-{{token}}"}. Needs CORS-readable public create/list endpoints (or inconclusive). Badge only when create→read→refresh finds the token (detects false success).
Two-account authorization (User B cannot see/change User A)
Authorization evidence source: Cross-account ownership test (trust level 5/6). These are not equivalent. Unauthenticated probe alone is weaker (source: unauthenticated API probe). Tokens stay in this browser session only — not uploaded to Flows servers.
Generated edge-case tests (review / approve)
- api_probe Submitting the form empty is rejected with a clear error
- api_probe Each required field can be omitted and fails validation
- api_probe Malformed email is rejected
- api_probe Logged-out users cannot open protected pages
- api_probe Protected API rejects requests without credentials
Generated from this route’s signals — you approve; you do not invent security tests.
Content probe (GET body contains text)
In-product content probe reads response text when CORS allows — not full DOM/click automation. Playwright script is optional and external.
Proof strength
thin · 0/100
Heuristic from notes + probes + gates — not a production certification.
Verification adapters
- ● Deploy URL probe · idle
- ● API path probe · idle
- ● Authz probe (unauth → 401/403) · idle
- ● Browser persistence · idle
- ● App persistence (create→read) · idle
- ● Content / body text probe · idle
- ○ In-product Playwright DOM · not embedded (download external script)
Filled circles = available here. Empty = not shipped. Probes are not a production audit. Adapter docs
Step 1 of 4
Not startedChoose tools worth exposing and set up the SDK
A first server succeeds by doing few things properly.
Flows keeps plan, checks, failures, and next steps connected
Your AI tool writes or changes the code
Repository grounds the plan only after inspect
Checks always carry a validation tier
How this plan was created
Plan from project details
Flows creates steps using the goal, requirements, stack, platform, and details you provide.
- Project description
- Selected template / route
- User-entered stack
- Constraints and notes
- Build Your First MCP Server
No repository inspection implied. Connect and inspect a codebase to ground steps in real files.
Codebase access
Checking GitHub…
Or paste a repository URL manually
Use these instructions in Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor, Emergent, or another builder.
Plan the server. Choose 2-3 tools that are genuinely useful and safely scoped for a first server - good candidates: a project-search tool (query in, ranked hits out), a read-only data lookup from my domain, and one bounded action tool. For each, write the name, steering description, and JSON schema (apply tight-schema practice: enums, ranges, additionalProperties false). Install the official MCP SDK for my language (verify the current package name and API from the official docs - the ecosystem moves fast) and scaffold the server project with the SDK's canonical structure.
Project context
Copies the project goal, technical details, current step, previous progress, and checks so your AI tool understands what it is working on.
Expected after this step
A scoped tool plan plus a scaffolded SDK project.
Should not happen
- ✕Hand-rolled protocol handling that breaks on the first spec nuance
- ✕Tools that work in isolation but fail through the host's serialization
- ✕Errors thrown as exceptions that kill the server instead of error results
- ✕No logging, making host-side failures undiagnosable
Verify gate — prove this step works before continuing
Do not move on until every check is true. Add proof notes — a checked box alone is weak proof. Checks are manual by default; deploy/API probes live under “More verification tools” and do not auto-check boxes.
Do not continue if…
- !Hand-rolled protocol handling that breaks on the first spec nuance
- !Tools that work in isolation but fail through the host's serialization
- !Errors thrown as exceptions that kill the server instead of error results
- !No logging, making host-side failures undiagnosable
Repair path — if this step fails
Use the Repair Prompt when a verify gate fails. Loop: Detected → Diagnosed → Repair issued → Changed → Retested → Resolved
Show repair prompt textShow
The SDK examples do not match the installed version. Check the version-specific docs or the SDK's own examples directory - MCP SDKs have had breaking API changes between versions.
Your notes for this step
Definition of Done
Final route-level requirements. Manual checks — separate from per-step verify gates. Completing step gates does not auto-check these. Route completion is not a production-ready claim.