Skip to main content
Glama
chalshik

mcp-infra

by chalshik
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

mcp-infra

An MCP (Model Context Protocol) server for infrastructure introspection — lets AI assistants query which processes are listening on specific ports on your machine.

What it does

Exposes a single tool to MCP clients (like Claude Desktop or Claude Code):

get_processes_by_ports — given a list of port numbers, returns the process name and PID for each listening socket.

// Example response for ports [8000, 3000]
{
  "8000": [{ "name": "python", "pid": "12345" }],
  "3000": [{ "name": "node", "pid": "67890" }]
}

This is useful when you want your AI assistant to understand what's running on your machine — e.g. "what's listening on port 5432?" or "check if my dev server is up."

Requirements

  • Python 3.11+

  • Linux (uses ss from iproute2)

  • uv (recommended) or pip

Installation

git clone https://github.com/your-username/mcp-infra
cd mcp-infra
uv sync

Or with pip:

pip install -e .

Usage

Run directly

uv run server.py
# or
python server.py

Add to Claude Desktop

Add this to your claude_desktop_config.json:

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "infra": {
      "command": "uv",
      "args": ["run", "/path/to/mcp-infra/server.py"]
    }
  }
}

Add to Claude Code

claude mcp add infra -- uv run /path/to/mcp-infra/server.py

Tool reference

get_processes_by_ports(ports: list[int]) -> str

Returns a JSON string mapping each port to a list of processes.

Field

Type

Description

ports

list[int]

Port numbers to query

Response shape per port:

  • name — process name

  • pid — process ID as string

  • raw — unparsed line (fallback if parsing fails)

  • error — error message if ss failed for that port

How it works

Uses the ss command (ss -tlnp sport = :<port>) to list TCP sockets in LISTEN state, then parses the users:((...)) field to extract process names and PIDs.

Contributing

Pull requests are welcome. Keep it focused — this is intentionally a small, single-purpose server.

License

MIT

Available Tools

1 tool
get_processes_by_portsA

Return all running processes listening on the given ports.

Args: ports: List of port numbers to check.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
portsYes

Output Schema

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescription
resultYes

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'running processes' and 'listening on ports', which gives some behavioral context, but lacks details on permissions needed, rate limits, error handling, or what 'return' entails (e.g., format, pagination). This is a significant gap for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by a brief parameter explanation. It's appropriately sized with zero waste, making it easy to scan and understand quickly.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's low complexity (1 parameter, no nested objects) and the presence of an output schema (which handles return values), the description is mostly complete. It covers the purpose and parameter semantics adequately, though behavioral transparency could be improved to fully compensate for the lack of annotations.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning by explaining that 'ports' are 'port numbers to check', clarifying the parameter's purpose beyond the schema's basic type definition. However, it doesn't detail constraints like valid port ranges or handling of invalid inputs.

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 specific action ('Return all running processes listening on') and resource ('the given ports'), with no sibling tools to differentiate from. It directly answers what the tool does without being vague or tautological.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage when you need to find processes by ports, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, prerequisites, or exclusions. With no sibling tools, the context is straightforward but lacks detailed usage instructions.

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.

  1. 1 tool updatev0.1.0
    • First observedget_processes_by_ports
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

A3.6/5.0

Scored across 1 tool

Disambiguation5/5

With only one tool, there is no possibility of ambiguity or overlap with other tools, making disambiguation perfect.

Naming Consistency5/5

The single tool name follows a clear verb_noun pattern (get_processes_by_ports), and with no other tools, consistency is inherently perfect.

Tool Count2/5

A single tool is too few for a server named 'mcp-infra', which suggests a broader infrastructure management scope, making this an under-scoped and incomplete tool surface.

Completeness1/5

The tool surface is severely incomplete for an infrastructure domain; it only provides a specific query for processes by ports, lacking any other operations like system monitoring, resource management, or general process handling.

Resources

Related MCP Connectors