Back to skills
SKILL.md
Webmcp Mcp Bridge
ASecurityIntegrate WebMCP client-side tools with backend MCP servers and UCP endpoints — bridge browser-based agent interactions with server-to-server protocols. Use when connecting front-end WebMCP to existing backend API infrastructure.
- 39 stars
- 0 votes
- 0 copies
- 2 views
- Added May 29, 2026
Works with
Security analysis
100/100npx -y skills add OrcaQubits/agentic-commerce-skills-plugins --skill webmcp-mcp-bridge --agent claude-codeAre you the author of Webmcp Mcp Bridge?
Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/orcaqubits-webmcp-mcp-bridge)---
name: webmcp-mcp-bridge
description: >
Integrate WebMCP client-side tools with backend MCP servers and UCP endpoints
— bridge browser-based agent interactions with server-to-server protocols. Use
when connecting front-end WebMCP to existing backend API infrastructure.
---
# WebMCP + Backend Protocol Bridge
## Before writing code
**Fetch live docs**:
1. Fetch `https://webmachinelearning.github.io/webmcp/` for WebMCP client-side specification
2. Web-search `webmcp backend MCP integration bridge` for bridge architecture patterns
3. Web-search `site:github.com mcp-b backend MCP bridge` for MCP-B polyfill's backend translation features
4. Web-search `webmcp UCP Universal Commerce Protocol integration` for UCP bridge patterns
## Conceptual Architecture
### Why Bridge WebMCP and Backend Protocols
WebMCP and backend protocols serve different scenarios:
| Scenario | Protocol |
|----------|----------|
| User in browser, agent assisting | **WebMCP** (client-side) |
| Headless agent, no UI | **MCP** (server-to-server) |
| Agent-to-agent delegation | **A2A** (agent-to-agent) |
| Structured product discovery | **UCP** (commerce-specific) |
| Payment authorization | **AP2** (cryptographic payments) |
A business often needs both: WebMCP for browser-present users and MCP/UCP for headless scenarios. The bridge ensures both paths use the same backend logic.
### Architecture Patterns
#### Pattern 1: WebMCP Tool → Existing REST API → Same Backend as MCP
```
Browser Agent Headless Agent
| |
WebMCP Tool MCP Tool Call
| |
fetch("/api/products") JSON-RPC to MCP Server
| |
+--------→ Same Backend API ←------+
```
Both WebMCP tools and MCP tools call the same backend services. WebMCP tools use the user's session; MCP tools use API credentials.
#### Pattern 2: WebMCP Tool → UCP Endpoint
```
Browser Agent
|
WebMCP searchProducts tool
|
fetch("https://merchant.com/.well-known/ucp/products")
|
UCP-formatted response → parsed → returned to agent
```
WebMCP tools can call UCP endpoints directly, translating between the browser tool interface and UCP's JSON/REST API.
#### Pattern 3: MCP-B Polyfill Translation
The MCP-B polyfill can translate between WebMCP client-side tools and backend MCP services:
```
Browser Agent ←→ MCP-B Polyfill ←→ Backend MCP Server
```
This enables a single tool definition to work in both browser and server contexts.
### Implementation: WebMCP Tool Calling REST API
```js
navigator.modelContext.registerTool({
name: "searchProducts",
description: "Search the product catalog",
inputSchema: {
type: "object",
properties: {
query: { type: "string" },
maxPrice: { type: "number" }
},
required: ["query"]
},
annotations: { readOnlyHint: true },
async execute(input) {
// Call the same API that the MCP server would call
const params = new URLSearchParams({
q: input.query,
...(input.maxPrice && { max_price: input.maxPrice })
});
const res = await fetch(`/api/products/search?${params}`, {
credentials: "same-origin" // Uses user's session cookies
});
return await res.json();
}
});
```
### Implementation: WebMCP Tool Calling UCP
```js
navigator.modelContext.registerTool({
name: "searchProducts",
description: "Search products via Universal Commerce Protocol",
inputSchema: { /* ... */ },
async execute(input) {
// Call UCP product discovery endpoint
const res = await fetch("/api/ucp/products", {
method: "POST",
headers: { "Content-Type": "application/json" },
body: JSON.stringify({
query: input.query,
filters: input.filters
}),
credentials: "same-origin"
});
return await res.json();
}
});
```
### Shared Tool Definition Strategy
Define tool schemas once, use in both WebMCP and MCP:
```js
// shared/tool-definitions.js
export const searchProductsTool = {
name: "searchProducts",
description: "Search the product catalog",
inputSchema: { /* ... */ }
};
// webmcp/tools.js — browser-side
import { searchProductsTool } from "../shared/tool-definitions.js";
navigator.modelContext.registerTool({
...searchProductsTool,
async execute(input) {
return await fetch(`/api/search?q=${input.query}`).then(r => r.json());
}
});
// mcp/server.js — server-side
import { searchProductsTool } from "../shared/tool-definitions.js";
mcpServer.registerTool({
...searchProductsTool,
handler: async (input) => {
return await productService.search(input.query);
}
});
```
### Best Practices
- Share tool schemas between WebMCP and MCP to ensure consistency
- WebMCP tools use session cookies; MCP tools use API keys — same backend, different auth
- Test both paths (browser and headless) against the same backend
- Consider caching at the API layer to handle both WebMCP and MCP traffic
- Document which tools are available via WebMCP vs MCP vs both
Fetch the latest MCP-B bridge documentation and UCP integration patterns before implementing cross-protocol bridges.
Attribution
Comments
Loading comments…