Terminally MCP

# MCP Specification Test Results ## Summary Your Terminally-mcp server has been tested against comprehensive MCP protocol specification tests. The results show that the server is **mostly compliant** with the MCP specification, with 24 out of 26 tests passing. ## Test Coverage ### ✅ Passing Tests (24/26) #### 1. JSON-RPC 2.0 Protocol Compliance ✅ - ✅ Returns valid JSON-RPC 2.0 responses - ✅ Handles requests without params - ✅ Returns errors for unknown methods - ✅ Handles malformed JSON gracefully - ✅ Handles missing jsonrpc version #### 2. Tool Discovery (tools/list) ✅ - ✅ Lists all 5 available tools correctly - ✅ Provides complete tool metadata - ✅ Specifies required parameters correctly - ✅ Includes return type information #### 3. Tool Invocation (tools/call) ⚠️ - ✅ Calls tools with valid parameters - ❌ **FAILS: Does not validate missing required parameters** - ✅ Handles unknown tool names - ✅ Handles optional parameters - ✅ Returns properly formatted results #### 4. Server Capabilities ✅ - ✅ Responds to server/capabilities (returns proper error if not implemented) #### 5. Error Handling ✅ - ✅ Uses standard MCP error codes - ✅ Handles invalid parameter types gracefully - ✅ Provides meaningful error messages #### 6. Protocol Edge Cases ⚠️ - ✅ Handles empty params object - ❌ **FAILS: Times out when handling null params** - ✅ Handles very long tool arguments - ✅ Maintains request ID in responses #### 7. Tool-Specific Validation ✅ - ✅ create_tab returns valid window_id format (@\d+) - ✅ list_tabs returns proper tab structure - ✅ execute_command handles timeout parameter - ✅ read_output handles history_limit parameter ## Issues Found ### Issue 1: Missing Required Parameter Validation **Test:** `should handle missing required parameters` **Problem:** When calling `close_tab` without the required `window_id` parameter, the server does not return an error as expected. **Impact:** Low - Clients might get unexpected behavior **Fix Required:** Add parameter validation in the tool handlers to check for required parameters before processing ### Issue 2: Null Params Handling **Test:** `should handle null params` **Problem:** When sending `null` as params to `tools/list`, the server times out instead of handling it gracefully **Impact:** Medium - Could cause client timeouts **Fix Required:** Add null checks in the request handlers ## Server Configuration Verification ### ✅ Correctly Configured: 1. **Protocol Version**: Correctly reports version 0.3 2. **Tool Registration**: All 5 tools are properly registered and discoverable 3. **Tool Metadata**: Each tool has proper schema definitions with: - Name - Description - Input schema with properties and required fields - Return type definitions 4. **Response Format**: Follows MCP response format with content array containing text type 5. **Error Handling**: Returns proper JSON-RPC errors with codes and messages 6. **Request ID Tracking**: Maintains request IDs correctly in responses ### ⚠️ Needs Improvement: 1. **Parameter Validation**: Should validate required parameters before executing tools 2. **Null Handling**: Should handle null params gracefully ## Recommendations 1. **Add Parameter Validation**: Implement validation in tool handlers to check for required parameters 2. **Handle Edge Cases**: Add null checks for params in request handlers 3. **Consider Adding**: - More comprehensive error codes for different failure scenarios - Request/response logging for debugging - Rate limiting for production use ## Overall Assessment **Score: 92% (24/26 tests passing)** Your MCP server is **well-configured and largely compliant** with the MCP specification. The server correctly: - Implements the JSON-RPC 2.0 protocol - Exposes all tools with proper metadata - Handles most edge cases gracefully - Provides meaningful error messages The two failing tests are relatively minor issues that can be easily fixed with parameter validation improvements. The server is production-ready for most use cases, though addressing the identified issues would improve robustness.