Skip to main content
Glama
deenesjakoruzh
VadimNastoyashchy

json-mcp-server

by VadimNastoyashchy
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersScoreDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript

JSON MCP

Smithery Badge

The Model Context Protocol (MCP) server empowers LLMs to efficiently interact with JSON files. With JSON MCP, you can split, merge, and find specific data, validate within JSON files based on defined conditions.

🌟 Key Features

✅ Fast and lightweight
✅ LLM-friendly functionality

Related MCP server: mcp-server-test

🎥 Demo

Below is a demo showcasing the split functionality:

Demo: Split JSON

🔧 Use Cases (Tools)

1. split

Split a JSON file into a specified number of objects.

Note: The file path must be provided.

Prompt Example:

Split JSON file from /Users/json-mcp/tests/merged.json
5 objects per file

2. merge

Merge JSON files into a one JSON file

Note: The folder path should be provided

Prompt Example:

Merge json files from /Users/json-mcp/tests

⚙️ Configuration

VS Code Manual Configuration

To configure the JSON MCP server manually in VS Code, update the User Settings (JSON) file:

{
  "mcp": {
    "servers": {
      "json-mcp-server": {
        "command": "npx",
        "args": ["json-mcp-server@latest"]
      }
    }
  }
}

Installation in VS Code

You can install the JSON MCP server using the VS Code CLI:

# For VS Code
code --add-mcp '{"name":"json-mcp-server","command":"npx","args": ["json-mcp-server@latest"]}'

After installation, the JSON MCP server will be available for use with your GitHub Copilot agent in VS Code.

Claude Desktop

To install json-mcp for Claude Desktop automatically via Smithery:

npx -y @smithery/cli install @VadimNastoyashchy/json-mcp --client claude

⚙️ Installation Server

Install globally

npm install -g json-mcp-server@latest

Run after global installation

json-mcp-server

Using npx with latest version (recommended)

npx json-mcp-server@latest

Available Tools

2 tools
mergeC

Merge JSON files into a one JSON file

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYes

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided. The description only says 'merge', without disclosing critical behaviors like conflict resolution, merge strategy (shallow vs deep), output location, or whether it modifies input files.

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?

The description is a single short sentence, which is concise but sacrifices clarity. It is front-loaded but lacks necessary detail.

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 one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too incomplete. It does not explain merge behavior, input constraints, or output format, leaving significant gaps for an 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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage for the 'path' parameter, and the description does not explain what 'path' represents. It could be a file path or directory; the ambiguity reduces usefulness.

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 merges JSON files into one, with a verb 'merge' and resource 'JSON files'. It distinguishes from the sibling 'split' by being the opposite operation. However, it lacks specificity about what 'path' refers to (a single file? a directory?)

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. The sibling 'split' suggests a complementary tool, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use is given.

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

splitB

Split a JSON file into a specified number of objects

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYes
numObjectsYes

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

The description does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether the original file is modified or a new file created), required permissions, or other behavioral traits. With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but provides minimal info.

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?

Single sentence, no unnecessary words. However, the description could benefit from additional structure to cover key behavioral aspects.

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?

For a simple tool with two parameters, the description is minimally adequate but leaves questions unanswered, such as output behavior and impact on input file. Missing details reduce completeness.

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 coverage is 0%, and the description adds no meaning beyond the schema. For example, 'path' and 'numObjects' are not detailed—no clarification on file format, location constraints, or how numObjects is applied.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states the action (split) and the resource (JSON file). It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'merge' by implying opposite functionality.

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 (e.g., 'merge'). No context about prerequisites or exclusions.

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.

  1. 2 tool updatesv1.0.0
    • First observedmerge
    • First observedsplit
Install Server
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Merge and split are clearly opposite operations. An agent can easily distinguish their purposes without ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

Both tools use concise, single-word verbs (merge, split) following a consistent pattern.

Tool Count4/5

Two tools is slightly below the typical well-scoped range, but the server's narrow focus on merge/split operations justifies this minimal set.

Completeness4/5

The server covers the core merge and split operations for JSON files. Minor gaps like transform or validate exist, but the surface is complete for its stated purpose.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.

Looking for Admin?

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

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

Appeared in Searches

Latest Blog Posts

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/VadimNastoyashchy/json-mcp'

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