Don't hand-write tool wrappers — generate the server from your OpenAPI
contract. That's the difference between a weekend of tedium that drifts
from the API, and a server that stays in sync with it.

FROM CONTRACT, NOT BY HAND
  Point it at your OpenAPI spec → it generates the MCP tools:
  each endpoint becomes a tool, with input schemas derived from the
  spec's parameter definitions and validated against them. Python or
  TypeScript.

  Why this beats hand-writing:
  • Schema validation is inherited from the contract — you don't
    re-describe every parameter and risk describing it wrong.
  • When the API changes, you regenerate. Hand-written wrappers drift
    silently until a tool call fails in production.
  • Large APIs are the same effort as small ones.

WHAT PRODUCTION-READY MEANS HERE
Not just "it calls the endpoint":
  • Input validation at the tool boundary (from the schema), so a bad
    call fails cleanly instead of hitting your API malformed.
  • Auth handled once, not copy-pasted per tool.
  • Safe evolution — the generated structure is designed to be
    regenerated as the contract changes without hand-editing every tool.

THE SAFE-EVOLUTION POINT
This is the part hand-wrapping gets wrong. A hand-written MCP server is a
second source of truth that has to be manually kept in step with the
API. A contract-generated one has ONE source of truth — the OpenAPI spec
— so the API and the MCP server can't drift apart.

WHAT I NEED
Your OpenAPI spec (or the endpoint list + a note on auth). With the spec,
I scaffold the full server; without one, I can generate a spec from the
endpoints first, then build from that — which also leaves you with a
contract you didn't have.

Do you have an OpenAPI/Swagger spec, or just the running API?