Skip to main content
Glama
enesjakozh
PhialsBasement

cmd-mcp-server

by PhialsBasement
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

CMD MCP サーバー

鍛冶屋のバッジnpmダウンロード WindowsとLinuxの両方でCMDコマンドを実行し、SSH接続を可能にするモデルコンテキストプロトコル（MCP）サーバー実装。このサーバーにより、コマンドライン操作をMCP対応アプリケーションに統合できます。

特徴

  • MCP を介して CMD コマンドを実行する

  • TypeScript実装

  • 公式MCP SDKをベースに構築

  • クロスプラットフォームの互換性

Related MCP server: Globalping

インストール

Smithery経由でインストール

Smithery経由で Claude Desktop 用の CMD サーバーを自動的にインストールするには:

npx -y @smithery/cli install server-cmd --client claude

手動インストール

npm install server-cmd

前提条件

  • Node.js（v16以上を推奨）

  • npm または yarn パッケージマネージャー

使用法

import { MCPCmdServer } from 'server-cmd';

// Initialize the server
const server = new MCPCmdServer();

// Start the server
server.start();

構成

サーバーは、環境変数または構成オブジェクトを通じて構成できます。

const config = {
  // Add your configuration options here
};

const server = new MCPCmdServer(config);

発達

開発環境をセットアップするには:

  1. リポジトリをクローンします。

git clone https://github.com/PhialsBasement/CMD-MCP-Server.git
cd CMD-MCP-Server

  1. 依存関係をインストールします:

npm install

  1. プロジェクトをビルドします。

npm run build

スクリプト

  • npm run build - TypeScript を JavaScript にコンパイルする

  • npm run prepare - 公開用のパッケージを準備する

依存関係

  • @modelcontextprotocol/sdk : ^1.0.1

  • glob :^10.3.10

  • zod-to-json-schema : ^3.23.5

貢献

貢献を歓迎します！お気軽にプルリクエストを送信してください。

ライセンス

このプロジェクトは MIT ライセンスに基づいてライセンスされています - 詳細については LICENSE ファイルを参照してください。

安全

コマンドライン操作の実行は潜在的に危険を伴う可能性があることにご注意ください。本番環境でこのサーバーを使用する場合は、適切なセキュリティ対策と入力検証を実装してください。

サポート

問題や機能のリクエストについては、 GitHub の問題追跡ツールを使用してください。

Available Tools

2 tools
execute_commandA

Execute a command and return its output. Commands run in a persistent shell session by default. Use newSession: true to run in a new shell instance.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
commandYes
newSessionNo

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that commands run in a persistent shell session by default and can be run in a new instance, which is useful behavioral context. However, it lacks details on permissions, security implications, error handling, or output format, which are important for a command execution 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 appropriately sized and front-loaded, with two clear sentences that efficiently convey key information without waste. Each sentence earns its place by explaining the core function and a critical parameter behavior.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (command execution with potential security and behavioral implications), no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It covers the basic operation and session behavior but lacks details on permissions, error handling, output structure, or safety warnings, which are crucial for such a tool.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning by explaining the 'newSession' parameter's effect (running in a new shell instance vs. default persistent session) and implies 'command' is the input to execute. It doesn't detail the 'command' parameter's format or constraints, but provides enough context for basic usage.

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 tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Execute') and resource ('a command'), and specifies it returns output. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'execute_ssh_command' tool, which likely has a different context or target.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description provides clear context about when to use the 'newSession' parameter (to run in a new shell instance vs. the default persistent session). It doesn't explicitly mention when to use this tool versus the sibling 'execute_ssh_command' or other alternatives, which is a minor gap.

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

execute_ssh_commandC

Execute a command on a remote server via SSH. Commands run in a persistent SSH session by default. Use newSession: true to run in a new session.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
hostYes
portNo
usernameYes
passwordNo
privateKeyNo
commandYes
newSessionNo

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 full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions the persistent session behavior and newSession option, which is helpful. However, it doesn't cover critical aspects like security implications, error handling, timeout behavior, or output format. For a tool that executes remote commands with authentication parameters, this leaves significant gaps.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is appropriately concise with two sentences. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second provides important behavioral context about session persistence. No wasted words, though it could be more comprehensive given the tool's complexity.

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 tool with 7 parameters, 0% schema description coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain authentication methods (password vs. privateKey), command execution context, error scenarios, or return values. The description should provide more guidance given the tool's security-sensitive nature and complexity.

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 for all 7 parameters. The description only mentions the 'newSession' parameter explicitly. It doesn't explain the purpose or relationships of host, port, username, password, privateKey, or command parameters. The description adds minimal value beyond what the bare schema provides.

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 tool's purpose: 'Execute a command on a remote server via SSH.' It specifies the action (execute), resource (remote server), and method (SSH). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'execute_command' (which might be for local execution or different protocols).

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description provides some usage context: 'Commands run in a persistent SSH session by default. Use newSession: true to run in a new session.' This gives guidance on session behavior but doesn't explain when to use this tool versus the sibling 'execute_command' or address authentication method selection (password vs. privateKey).

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.

  1. 2 tool updatesv1.0.0
    • Addedexecute_command
    • Addedexecute_ssh_command
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

B3.3/5.0

Scored across 2 tools

Disambiguation5/5

The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: execute_command handles local shell commands, while execute_ssh_command handles remote SSH commands. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them, as each targets a different execution environment.

Naming Consistency5/5

Both tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with 'execute_' as the prefix and descriptive suffixes ('command' and 'ssh_command'). The naming is perfectly uniform and predictable across the tool set.

Tool Count2/5

With only 2 tools, the server feels thin for a command execution domain. It lacks essential operations like listing available commands, managing sessions, or handling file operations, which are common in such contexts. The count is too low for adequate coverage.

Completeness2/5

The tool set is severely incomplete for command execution. It covers basic local and remote command execution but misses critical functionalities such as session management tools, command history, file transfer, or environment configuration, leaving significant gaps for agent workflows.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

Appeared in Searches