Skip to main content
Glama
YangPan2020

DebugForge

by YangPan2020
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to DebugForge

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • lldb-mcp-server

      FYTJ
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      An MCP server that exposes LLDB debugging capabilities, enabling AI-assisted interactive debugging of C/C++ applications through 40 specialized tools.
      4
      MIT

    • gdb_mcp

      airfloats
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      An MCP server that enables AI assistants to control GDB debugging sessions, including breakpoint management, thread analysis, and variable inspection, using the GDB/MI protocol.
      22
      1
      MIT

    • gdb and rr Debugging

      schuay
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      MCP server that exposes GDB debugging as tools. An AI assistant can set breakpoints, run programs, step through code, inspect variables and memory, and examine registers — all via structured tool calls. Reverse debugging with rr is also supported.
      34
      3
      MIT

    • McuBuddy

      cunjun
      A
      license
      C
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      MCP server for AI-assisted MCU and embedded firmware debugging. It connects to real hardware via debug probes, inspects CPU/memory/peripherals, manages Keil builds, and provides structured evidence for fault diagnosis.
      19
      6
      MIT
    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

    A3.5/5.0

    Scored across 112 tools

    Disambiguation3/5

    While each tool has a distinct function, the high granularity creates numerous similar-purpose tools (e.g., multiple breakpoint types, multiple memory read variants, multiple step/go commands). The descriptions help differentiate, but an agent may struggle to select the correct tool among many closely related options.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    Most tools follow a verb_noun pattern with underscores (e.g., read_memory, set_breakpoint). Minor deviations exist, such as 'step_mode_list' (noun first) and 'bmc_set_atob' (prefix then verb), but overall the naming is predictable and readable.

    Tool Count1/5

    With 112 tools, the set is excessively large for an MCP server. This overwhelms agent selection and increases the risk of mis-picking. A debugger surface should typically be 10-20 tools; this is far beyond that, severely hurting usability.

    Completeness5/5

    The tool set covers the full debug workflow: connection, target control, breakpoints (all types), memory/register access, trace, performance counters, build/flash, system configuration, and even a knowledge base. No obvious gaps exist for the stated AURIX debugging domain.

    Maintenance

    ActivitySlowing
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources