ProxyPin MCP Server
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| PROXYPIN_DATA_DIR | No | ProxyPin history directory | auto-detect |
| PROXYPIN_HAR_LIMIT | No | max HAR files scanned | 50 |
| PROXYPIN_MAX_BODY_SIZE | No | max body bytes kept | 102400 |
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| prompts | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| resources | {
"subscribe": false,
"listChanged": false
} |
| experimental | {} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| list_requestsC | List recent HTTP requests captured by ProxyPin. |
| get_requestB | Get detailed information for a single request. |
| search_requestsC | Search requests by keyword. |
| analyze_apiC | Analyze API structure for a domain. |
| get_domainsB | Get list of all captured domains with request counts. |
| generate_codeC | Generate API call code from a captured request. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| analyze_api_prompt | Prompt for API analysis. |
| debug_request_prompt | Prompt for debugging a request. |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| recent_requests_resource | Recent requests summary. |
| domains_resource | List of captured domains. |
TDQS
Scored across 6 tools
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose with no ambiguity. analyze_api focuses on API structure analysis, generate_code on code generation, get_domains on domain listing, get_request on single request details, list_requests on recent requests, and search_requests on keyword-based search. The boundaries are well-defined and non-overlapping.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (e.g., analyze_api, generate_code, get_domains, get_request, list_requests, search_requests). The naming is uniform, predictable, and enhances readability across the toolset.
With 6 tools, the count is well-scoped for a proxy capture and analysis server. Each tool serves a specific function in the workflow (e.g., listing, searching, analyzing, generating), and none appear redundant or unnecessary for the domain.
The toolset covers core workflows for proxy capture and analysis, including listing, searching, retrieving details, analyzing structure, and generating code. A minor gap might be the absence of tools for managing or filtering captures (e.g., delete_requests, filter_by_method), but agents can likely work around this with the existing search and list tools.