F
licenseB
qualityF
maintenanceA Model Context Protocol server that allows AI assistants to execute and manage JMeter performance tests through natural language commands.
6
72
-
k6-mcp-server
by QAInsights
Related Servers
Alternatives to k6-mcp-server
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- FlicenseCqualityDmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol server that enables execution of JMeter performance tests through AI assistants and MCP-compatible clients like Claude, Cursor, and Windsurf.2-
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables running k6 load tests with customizable duration and virtual users via natural language, with real-time output and LLM-powered analysis.1-
- FlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol server implementation that can be run directly or through Docker, enabling AI assistants to interact with external systems through the MCP standard.2-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol (MCP) server implementation that enables AI assistants to interact with Anytype's API through natural language, allowing users to manage their knowledge base through conversation.862517MIT
- FlicenseCqualityDmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol server that enables executing and interacting with JMeter tests through MCP-compatible clients like Claude Desktop, Cursor, and Windsurf.2-
TDQS
C2.8/5.0
Scored across 2 tools
Disambiguation1/5
The two tools are essentially identical in purpose and functionality, both executing k6 load tests with the exact same parameters (script_file, duration, vus). The only difference is the tool name, which creates confusion rather than clarity. An agent would have no meaningful basis to choose between them.
Naming Consistency3/5
Both tools follow a consistent snake_case pattern with 'execute_k6_test' as the base, which is readable. However, the second tool's name 'execute_k6_test_with_options' is redundant since the first tool already accepts options (duration and VUs), making the naming somewhat inconsistent in logic despite matching the format.
Tool Count2/5
With only 2 tools, the server feels thin for a load testing domain, as it lacks operations like listing tests, getting results, or managing test configurations. The tools are redundant, so the effective count is even lower, failing to cover basic workflows beyond a single execution action.
Completeness2/5
The server is severely incomplete for k6 load testing, missing essential operations such as retrieving test results, monitoring test status, or managing test scripts. It only offers execution with no way to access outcomes, leaving agents unable to perform a full testing lifecycle.
Maintenance
ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues