Coding Agent MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

run_command

Execute terminal commands in a specified working directory, with configurable timeout, shell execution, and environment variables.

Instructions

Execute a terminal command in a specified directory

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "command": "<command>"
    },
    "name": "run_command"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`command`	Yes	Command to execute
`workingDirectory`	No	Working directory for command execution	.
`timeout`	No	Command timeout in milliseconds
`shell`	No	Execute in shell
`env`	No	Environment variables to set

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.1May 29, 2026

TDQS

C2.8/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose side effects. Lacks information on blocking behavior, output capture, error handling, or security considerations.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

Single sentence is concise but omits crucial details. Appropriate length but not optimally informative.

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?

With 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description fails to provide sufficient context for correct usage, such as return values, error handling, or execution model.

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 covers all parameters with descriptions. Description adds no extra meaning beyond schema, so baseline score applies.

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?

Description clearly states the action (execute) and resource (terminal command) with a specified directory. While it could explicitly contrast with run_command_stream, the verb+resource is specific enough.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like run_command_stream. No mention of prerequisites or appropriate contexts for command execution.

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