What can you do with this server?

The SSH MCP Server allows secure remote access and execution via the MCP protocol. Its features include: * Execute commands on remote servers via SSH using a private key (ssh_exec). * Manage SSH credentials: add (add_credential), list (list_credentials), and remove (remove_credential). * Copy files/directories between local and remote systems using rsync (rsync_copy).

Which integrations are available for this server?

Manages SSH credentials storage through a SQLite database, enabling persistence of connection details for remote command execution.

How do I use SSH MCP Server?

1. Click on "Install Server". 2. Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state. 3. In the chat, type @ followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@SSH MCP Server list all my saved SSH credentials" That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed. Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.

en es ja ko zh

SSH MCP Server

by KinoThe-Kafkaesque

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Score Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Hybrid

SSH MCP Server

A Model Context Protocol (MCP) server implementation that provides SSH capabilities. This server allows for secure remote access and execution through the MCP protocol.

Features

SSH server implementation using MCP protocol
SQLite database integration for data persistence
TypeScript implementation for type safety and better development experience

Related MCP server: Remote Command MCP Server

Prerequisites

Node.js 18 or higher
npm or yarn package manager
TypeScript knowledge for development

Installation

Installing via Smithery

To install SSH Server for Claude Desktop automatically via Smithery:

npx -y @smithery/cli install @KinoThe-Kafkaesque/ssh-mcp-server --client claude

Manual Installation

Clone the repository:

git clone <repository-url>
cd ssh-server

Install dependencies:

npm install

Build the project:

npm run build

Usage

Configuration

The server uses a SQLite database (ssh.db) to store SSH credentials. The database file will be created automatically when the server starts.

Tools

The server stores named credentials, then every remote action refers to a credentialName. privateKeyPath must point to an existing private key.

add_credential: save { "name", "host", "username", "privateKeyPath" }.
list_credentials: list stored credential records.
remove_credential: delete { "name" }.
ssh_exec: run a shell command with { "credentialName", "command", "timeout" }.
ssh_exec_raw: run an argv-style command array, for example { "credentialName": "prod", "command": ["grep", "-E", "foo|bar", "/var/log/app.log"] }.
scp_copy: copy one file over SFTP with { "credentialName", "localPath", "remotePath", "direction" }.
rsync_copy: copy directories or larger trees with rsync and the same transfer shape.
ssh_session_start, ssh_session_send, ssh_session_read, ssh_session_end, ssh_session_list: manage interactive SSH sessions.
ssh_tunnel_start, ssh_tunnel_list, ssh_tunnel_stop: manage local or remote port-forwarding tunnels.

Example:

{
  "tool_name": "ssh_exec",
  "arguments": {
    "credentialName": "prod",
    "command": "uptime",
    "timeout": 120000
  }
}

Starting the server

npm start

The server will start running on the configured port (default settings can be modified in the source code).

Project Structure

src/ - Source code directory
build/ - Compiled JavaScript output
node_modules/ - Project dependencies

Dependencies

@modelcontextprotocol/sdk: MCP protocol implementation
sqlite3: SQLite database driver
typescript: Development dependency for TypeScript support

Development

To make changes to the project:

Make your changes in the src/ directory
Rebuild the project:

npm run build

Start the server to test your changes:

npm start

License

MIT

Contributing

Fork the repository
Create your feature branch
Commit your changes
Push to the branch
Create a new Pull Request

Available Tools

5 tools

add_credentialC

Add a new SSH credential with private key file path

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`host`	Yes
`name`	Yes
`privateKeyPath`	Yes
`username`	Yes

TDQS

C2.8/5.0

Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states it adds a credential but doesn't cover critical aspects: whether this requires admin permissions, if it overwrites existing credentials, error handling (e.g., invalid file paths), or what happens on success (e.g., confirmation message). It mentions 'private key file path' but not how it's stored or used. This leaves significant gaps for a mutation tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to scan. Every part of the sentence contributes directly to the tool's purpose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the complexity (a mutation tool for SSH credentials), lack of annotations, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain return values, error cases, or behavioral nuances. For a tool that likely involves security-sensitive operations, more context is needed to ensure safe and correct usage.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It only mentions 'private key file path', which maps to one of the four parameters (privateKeyPath). It doesn't explain the other parameters (host, name, username), their purposes, formats, or constraints. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, failing to address the coverage gap adequately.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Add') and resource ('SSH credential'), specifying it's for a new credential with a private key file path. It distinguishes from siblings like list_credentials (read) and remove_credential (delete), though it doesn't explicitly mention rsync_copy or ssh_exec. The purpose is specific but could be more detailed about what 'add' entails.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an existing private key file), exclusions, or comparisons to siblings like ssh_exec (which might use credentials). The description implies usage for adding SSH credentials but lacks contextual advice.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

list_credentialsB

List all stored SSH credentials

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No parameters

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states what the tool does but doesn't describe how it behaves: no information about return format (e.g., list structure, credential details), pagination, error conditions, or authentication requirements. This is a significant gap for a tool that accesses sensitive data.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with zero waste. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse. Every word earns its place without redundancy or unnecessary elaboration.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the complexity of listing credentials (sensitive data access) with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what information is returned (e.g., credential IDs, types, metadata), security implications, or how to handle the results, leaving critical gaps for the agent.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already fully documents the input. The description appropriately doesn't add parameter details, and the baseline for 0 parameters is 4. It could be 5 if it explicitly stated 'no parameters required' but this is minor.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('all stored SSH credentials'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from potential sibling tools like 'get_credentials' or 'search_credentials' if they existed, which prevents a perfect score.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'add_credential' or 'remove_credential'. It doesn't mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

remove_credentialC

Remove a stored SSH credential

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes

TDQS

C2.8/5.0

Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool performs a removal operation, implying mutation, but doesn't address critical aspects like whether this is destructive, irreversible, requires specific permissions, or what happens on success/failure. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, with zero waste.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (a mutation operation with no annotations, 0% schema coverage, and no output schema), the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavior, parameters, return values, and error handling, making it inadequate for safe and effective use by an AI agent.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the single parameter 'name' is undocumented in the schema. The description adds no semantic information about this parameter, such as what 'name' refers to (e.g., credential identifier), its format, or examples. It fails to compensate for the schema's lack of documentation.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Remove') and resource ('stored SSH credential'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't explicitly distinguish from siblings like 'add_credential' or 'list_credentials', but the verb 'Remove' inherently differentiates it from those operations.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'add_credential' or 'list_credentials'. The description lacks context about prerequisites (e.g., needing an existing credential to remove) or exclusions, leaving usage entirely implicit.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

rsync_copyC

Copy files/directories between local and remote server via rsync

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`credentialName`	Yes	Name of the stored credential to use
`direction`	Yes	Direction of copy (toRemote or fromRemote)
`localPath`	Yes	Path on the local machine
`remotePath`	Yes	Path on the remote server

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions copying via rsync but doesn't cover critical aspects like whether it overwrites files, handles symlinks, requires specific permissions, has rate limits, or what happens on errors. This leaves significant gaps for a file operation tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any fluff. It's front-loaded and every word contributes to understanding the core functionality.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the complexity of file copying with rsync, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It lacks details on behavior, error handling, and output format, which are essential for safe and effective use of this tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters thoroughly. The description adds no additional meaning beyond implying the need for paths and direction, which is already clear from the schema. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Copy files/directories') and the mechanism ('via rsync'), specifying both the resource (files/directories) and the scope (between local and remote server). It doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like ssh_exec, but the focus on copying distinguishes it from credential management tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like ssh_exec for other operations, nor does it mention prerequisites such as needing stored credentials. It only states what the tool does, not when or why to choose it.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

ssh_execC

Execute command over SSH using private key file path

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`command`	Yes
`host`	Yes
`privateKeyPath`	Yes
`username`	Yes

TDQS

C2.8/5.0

Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions the authentication mechanism but doesn't describe execution behavior (e.g., synchronous/asynchronous, timeout handling, error propagation, output capture, or security implications). For a potentially destructive remote execution tool, this is a significant gap.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that communicates the core functionality without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a tool with this complexity level and gets straight to the point.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a remote execution tool with 4 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what happens during execution, how output is returned, error handling, security considerations, or typical use patterns. The agent would need to guess about important behavioral aspects.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 0% schema description coverage for all 4 parameters, the description doesn't add any semantic information beyond what's implied by parameter names. It mentions 'private key file path' which aligns with the privateKeyPath parameter name but doesn't explain format expectations, path resolution, or relationships between parameters like host and username.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Execute command') and resource ('over SSH using private key file path'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like rsync_copy or credential management tools, but it's specific enough to understand what this tool does.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like rsync_copy or when SSH execution is appropriate. It mentions the authentication method (private key file path) but doesn't explain prerequisites, error conditions, or typical use cases.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

5 tool updatesv1.0.0Apr 13, 2025
- First observedadd_credential
- First observedlist_credentials
- First observedremove_credential
- First observedrsync_copy
- First observedssh_exec

Install Server

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose with no overlap: credential management (add, list, remove) is separate from remote operations (rsync, ssh_exec). The descriptions clearly differentiate between managing stored credentials and performing remote actions, eliminating any potential for misselection.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with snake_case: add_credential, list_credentials, remove_credential, rsync_copy, ssh_exec. The naming is predictable and readable throughout, with no deviations or mixed conventions.

Tool Count5/5

With 5 tools, this server is well-scoped for SSH operations. Each tool earns its place by covering essential functions: credential management (3 tools) and remote execution/copy (2 tools). This count is appropriate for the domain without being too thin or heavy.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers core SSH workflows: credential lifecycle (add, list, remove) and remote operations (execute, copy). A minor gap exists in credential updates (e.g., update_credential), but agents can work around this by removing and re-adding. Overall, the set provides good coverage for the stated purpose.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive

ResponsivenessResponsive

Resources

Need Help?

Related Servers

Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.

Looking for Admin?

If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.

Related MCP Connectors

hithereiamaliff-mcp-nextcloudOAuth
ai.smithery
A comprehensive Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that enables AI assistants to interact with yo…
Cloud Storage File Systems Workplace & Productivity
237
Studex MCP ServerOAuth
io.github.itshivams
Model Context Protocol server for Studex tools, notifications, and profile integrations
Developer Tools
1
todo.vu AOAuth
io.github.mooball
Model Context Protocol server for todo.vu task management and time tracking.
Payments & Billing Project Management Workplace & Productivity
2
mcp COAuth
com.wix
A Model Context Protocol server for Wix AI tools
Developer Tools Content Management Systems App Automation
216

Related MCP Servers

MCP SSH Server
Shell Access Command Line OS Automation
shaike1
F
license
Not graded
quality
F
maintenance
A secure SSH server implementation for Model Context Protocol that enables remote command execution and file operations, supporting both password and key-based authentication.
Updated 2 years ago (2024-12-02 19:53 UTC)
57
-
Remote Command MCP Server
Shell Access Command Line OS Automation
deepsuthar496
A
license
B
quality
F
maintenance
A Model Context Protocol server that enables remote execution of shell commands across different operating systems, automatically handling platform-specific differences between Windows and Unix-like systems.
Updated a year ago (2025-03-25 06:42 UTC)
1
MIT
SSH MCP Server
Shell Access Command Line
mfangtao
A
license
B
quality
C
maintenance
A server that enables remote command execution over SSH through the Model Context Protocol (MCP), supporting both password and private key authentication.
Updated a year ago (2025-06-26 06:12 UTC)
1
1
2
MIT
SSH MCP Server
Shell Access Code Execution
vilasone455
F
license
A
quality
D
maintenance
A local Model Context Protocol server that allows LLMs to securely execute shell commands on remote Linux and Windows systems via SSH connections.
Updated a year ago (2025-05-27 06:59 UTC)
6
25
2
-

Appeared in Searches

Latest Blog Posts

Who's Calling? MCP Hosts Are an Identity Blind Spot (And the Spec Knows It)
By Om-Shree-0709 on July 25, 2026.
mcp
Agent Identity
OAuth 2.1
Your AI Chatbot Just Exposed Your CEO's Salary to an Intern
By Om-Shree-0709 on July 2, 2026.
Agent Identity
MCP Security
OAuth Delegation
Why MCP Servers Need Execution Sandboxing (And Why Your Current Stack Isn't Enough)
By Om-Shree-0709 on June 30, 2026.
Agentic Ai
Prompt Injection
WebAssembly

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/KinoThe-Kafkaesque/ssh-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server