MCP Terminal Server
Servidor de terminales MCP
Un servidor de interfaz de línea de comandos seguro para el Protocolo de contexto de modelo (MCP) que permite que los modelos de IA interactúen con su terminal manteniendo la seguridad y el control.
Características
🔒 Ejecución segura de comandos con permisos configurables
📁 Operaciones del sistema de archivos dentro de las rutas permitidas
🌍 Gestión de variables de entorno
💻 Compatibilidad multiplataforma (Windows, macOS, Linux)
🔌 Soporte para conexiones de sistemas remotos mediante ejecución de comandos
Related MCP server: Shell MCP Server
Uso con Claude Desktop
Agregue la configuración del servidor a su archivo de configuración de Claude Desktop:
{
"mcpServers": {
"terminal": {
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"@dillip285/mcp-terminal",
"--allowed-paths",
"/path/to/allowed/directory"
]
}
}
}Reinicie Claude Desktop para aplicar los cambios. Ahora puede usar las funciones de terminal a través de Claude con acceso seguro a archivos y ejecución de comandos.
Herramientas disponibles
execute_command: ejecuta comandos de terminal de forma segura (incluidos SSH y comandos remotos)
Seguridad
Todas las operaciones están restringidas a rutas permitidas específicas
Los comandos se validan y se desinfectan antes de su ejecución.
Las variables de entorno se gestionan con cuidado
Manejo adecuado de errores relacionados con la seguridad
Desarrollo
# Clone the repository
git clone https://github.com/dillip285/mcp-terminal.git
# Install dependencies
npm install
# Configure npm authentication
cp .npmrc.example .npmrc
# Edit .npmrc and add your NPM_TOKEN
# Run tests
npm test
# Build the project
npm run buildPublicación
Para publicar el paquete:
Copiar
.npmrc.examplea.npmrcAgregue su token de autenticación npm a
.npmrcEjecute
npm publish --access public
Nota: Nunca envíes tu archivo .npmrc con el token de autenticación. Ya está añadido a .gitignore .
Contribuyendo
Bifurcar el repositorio
Crea tu rama de funciones (
git checkout -b feature/amazing-feature)Confirme sus cambios (
git commit -m 'feat: Add amazing feature')Empujar a la rama (
git push origin feature/amazing-feature)Abrir una solicitud de extracción
Licencia
Licencia MIT: consulte el archivo LICENCIA para obtener más detalles.
Proyectos relacionados
Apoyo
Para informes de errores y solicitudes de funciones, abra un problema .
Available Tools
1 toolexecute_commandC
Execute a command in the local system
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| args | No | Command arguments | |
| command | Yes | Command to execute | |
| cwd | No | Working directory for command execution |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While 'execute a command' implies a potentially powerful/mutating operation, it doesn't disclose critical behavioral traits like security implications, permission requirements, side effects, error handling, or output format. This leaves significant gaps for an AI agent to understand the tool's behavior.
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 extremely concise - a single sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any unnecessary words. It's perfectly front-loaded with the essential information.
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?
For a tool that executes system commands (a potentially dangerous operation with no output schema), the description is severely lacking. It doesn't address security implications, permission requirements, typical use cases, error handling, or what kind of output/result to expect. The absence of annotations exacerbates these gaps.
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?
The schema description coverage is 100%, meaning all parameters are documented in the schema itself. The description doesn't add any meaningful parameter semantics beyond what's already in the schema (command, args, cwd). This meets the baseline expectation when schema coverage is complete.
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 action ('execute') and target ('a command in the local system'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, since there are no sibling tools mentioned, it cannot demonstrate differentiation from alternatives, preventing a perfect score of 5.
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 versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites, constraints, or typical use cases. It simply states what the tool does without contextual usage information.
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 tool update
v1.0.0- First observed
execute_command
TDQS
Scored across 1 tool
With only one tool, there is no possibility of ambiguity or overlap between tools. The tool 'execute_command' has a clear and distinct purpose that cannot be confused with any other tool in this set.
The single tool name 'execute_command' follows a verb_noun pattern, and with only one tool, the naming is inherently consistent. There are no other tools to compare against, so no inconsistencies can arise.
A single tool for a terminal server feels too minimal for the apparent scope. While it covers basic command execution, typical terminal operations might include listing files, navigating directories, or managing processes, suggesting a gap in functionality.
The tool surface is severely incomplete for a terminal server domain. It only allows command execution, missing essential operations like file browsing, process management, or environment inspection, which are core to terminal workflows and will likely cause agent failures.
Maintenance
Related MCP Connectors
Operate Linux, macOS and Windows from your LLM. Every action runs through an auditable allowlist.
- emisarOAuthdev.emisar
Let AI operate servers without SSH. Choose actions, approve risky changes, and audit every step.
I run shell commands on your private cloud environment (bash, sh, zsh)
Real Linux labs your AI agent deploys, routes and runs, with domains, TLS, DBs and an audit log.
Related MCP Servers
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceA secure server that allows LLM applications like Claude to execute whitelisted system commands with user confirmation and comprehensive security features.-
- AlicenseBqualityFmaintenanceA secure server that enables AI applications to execute shell commands in specified directories, supporting multiple shell types (bash, sh, cmd, powershell) with built-in security features like directory isolation and timeout control.121Apache 2.0
- AlicenseAqualityFmaintenanceAn MCP server that enables secure terminal command execution, directory navigation, and file system operations through a standardized interface for LLMs.1034 PyPI97MIT
- AlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceA secure terminal execution server that enables controlled command execution with security features and resource limits via the Model Context Protocol (MCP).130 npm11MIT