스크립팅을 위한 네이티브 Clojure 인터프리터인 Babashka 와 상호작용하기 위한 모델 컨텍스트 프로토콜 서버입니다.
MCP 도구를 통해 Babashka 코드 실행
최근 명령 결과 캐시
MCP 리소스를 통해 명령 기록에 액세스
구성 가능한 명령 시간 초과
Related MCP server: Claude Code Control MCP
바바쉬카는 여러 가지 방법으로 설치할 수 있습니다.
지엑스피1
bash < <(curl -s https://raw.githubusercontent.com/babashka/babashka/master/install)# Using scoop
scoop install babashka다른 설치 방법에 대해서는 공식 Babashka 설치 가이드를 참조하세요.
설치 후 Babashka가 작동하는지 확인하세요.
# Check version
bb --version
# Try a simple expression
bb -e '(+ 1 2 3)'
# Run a script from string
bb -e '(defn hello [x] (str "Hello, " x "!")) (hello "World")'
# Use -i flag to process lines of input
ls | bb -i '(take 2 *input*)'# Install dependencies
npm install
# Build the MCP server
npm run build서버는 환경 변수를 통해 구성할 수 있습니다.
BABASHKA_PATH : Babashka 실행 파일의 경로(기본값: "bb")
선택적 시간 초과를 사용하여 Babashka 코드를 실행합니다.
{
name: "execute",
arguments: {
code: string; // Babashka code to execute
timeout?: number; // Timeout in milliseconds (default: 30000)
}
}예:
{
name: "execute",
arguments: {
code: "(+ 1 2 3)",
timeout: 5000
}
}서버는 다음을 통해 액세스할 수 있는 최근 명령 실행 캐시를 유지 관리합니다.
babashka://commands/{index} - 인덱스로 특정 명령 결과에 액세스
Babashka는 recur 특수 형식을 통해 명시적인 테일 콜 최적화를 지원하지만, 자동 TCO는 구현하지 않습니다. 예:
;; This will cause stack overflow
(defn countdown [n]
(if (zero? n)
:done
(countdown (dec n))))
;; This works with TCO using recur
(defn countdown [n]
(if (zero? n)
:done
(recur (dec n))))Babashka GitHub 저장소 - 주요 Babashka 프로젝트
바바슈카 북 - 공식 문서
바바쉬카 예제 - 예제 스크립트 모음
pod-babashka-buddy - Babashka용 암호화 API
bb-clis - 유용한 Babashka CLI 스크립트 모음
bb-scripts - 바바쉬카를 위한 다양한 유틸리티 스크립트
setup-babashka - Babashka 설치를 위한 GitHub 작업
babashka-docker-action - GitHub Actions에서 Babashka 스크립트 실행
이 서버는 궁극적으로 셀프 호스팅 방식으로 설계되었으며, 이는 Babashka 자체로 다시 작성될 것임을 의미합니다. 현재 TypeScript 구현은 참고 자료이자 시작점 역할을 합니다.
셀프 호스팅 구현
Babashka에서 MCP 서버를 다시 작성하세요
더 나은 성능을 위해 Babashka의 기본 기능을 활용하세요
Node.js 종속성 제거
MCP 프로토콜과 완벽한 호환성 유지
현재 모든 기능 지원:
명령 실행
자원 관리
명령 내역
타임아웃 처리
향상된 기능
Babashka 포드에 대한 지원 추가
파일 감시 기능 구현
REPL 통합 추가
여러 Babashka 인스턴스 지원
성능 최적화
캐싱 전략 구현
리소스 사용 최적화
시작 시간 단축
테스트 및 문서화
포괄적인 테스트 모음
API 문서
사용 예
성능 벤치마크
Execute Babashka (bb) code
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| code | Yes | Babashka code to execute | |
| timeout | No | Timeout in milliseconds (default: 30000) |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('execute') but doesn't describe key behaviors like execution environment, security implications, error handling, or output format. This is a significant gap for a tool that runs arbitrary code.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, efficient sentence with zero waste. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, clearly stating the tool's purpose without unnecessary elaboration.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the complexity of executing code and the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't address critical aspects like what the execution returns, error conditions, or safety considerations, leaving the agent with insufficient context for reliable use.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents both parameters (code and timeout). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as examples of valid Babashka code or timeout implications. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the verb ('execute') and resource ('Babashka (bb) code'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't need sibling differentiation since there are no sibling tools, but it could be slightly more specific about what 'execute' entails (e.g., running code in a Babashka environment).
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool, such as typical use cases, prerequisites, or alternatives. With no sibling tools, it doesn't need to distinguish from others, but it lacks any context about appropriate scenarios for executing Babashka code.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0executeScored across 1 tool
With only one tool, there is no possibility of ambiguity or overlap between tools. The single tool 'execute' has a clear and distinct purpose for running Babashka code.
A single tool inherently has perfect naming consistency, as there are no other tools to compare it against. The name 'execute' is straightforward and appropriate for its function.
A single tool is too few for most practical server purposes, as it severely limits functionality and flexibility. While it might suffice for a minimal interface, it feels thin and under-scoped for general use.
The tool provides basic execution capability, but there are notable gaps such as no tools for managing scripts, handling dependencies, or providing utilities like linting or debugging. This limits the server's usefulness for broader Babashka workflows.
A comprehensive Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that enables AI assistants to interact with yo…
Operate Linux, macOS and Windows from your LLM. Every action runs through an auditable allowlist.
A Model Context Protocol server for Wix AI tools
Enable secure connectivity between Sentry issues and debugging data, and LLM clients, using a Model Context Protocol (MCP) server.
