Skip to main content
Glama
GleisonOliveira

php-container-test-mcp

by GleisonOliveira
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to php-container-test-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • taw-computer

      tawgroup
      A
      license
      B
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      An MCP server that provides AI agents with a full Ubuntu desktop environment inside Docker, enabling them to perform complex computer tasks like browsing, coding, testing, and GUI automation.
      36
      8
      MIT

    • agent-regress

      Gaurav7974
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      A local MCP server that provides tools for AI coding agents to execute, evaluate, and diff regression tests for LLM agents.
      9 npm
      MIT

    • mcp-devenv

      dicoy
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      An MCP server that gives your AI assistant full awareness of your local dev environment — running processes, Docker containers, git state, open ports, log files, and more.
      4 npm
      1
      MIT
    Deploy Server
    One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

    TDQS

    A4.1/5.0

    Scored across 2 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: one runs a single specific test file, the other runs the entire test suite. There is no overlap, and the descriptions reinforce the distinction.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Both tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern using snake_case: run_php_test_file and run_php_tests. The naming is predictable and clear.

    Tool Count4/5

    With only two tools, the server is very focused on running PHP tests in a container. While it could benefit from additional tools (e.g., for coverage or test selection), the count is reasonable for a narrow, specialized purpose.

    Completeness2/5

    The tool surface lacks common test runner capabilities such as running specific test methods, filtering tests by group, or enabling coverage. The server only supports two coarse-grained operations, leaving significant gaps for typical testing workflows.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources