A
licenseNot graded
qualityD
maintenanceA server that implements the Model Context Protocol, providing a standardized way to connect AI models to different data sources and tools.
7 npm
11
MIT
Compresto MCP
by dqhieu
컴프레스토 MCP
Compresto용 MCP(Model Context Protocol) 서버는 AI 어시스턴트에게 Compresto 사용 통계에 대한 실시간 데이터를 제공합니다.
컴프레스토란 무엇인가요?
컴프레스토(Compresto)는 사용자가 파일 크기를 줄이는 데 도움을 주는 파일 압축 앱입니다. 이 MCP 서버를 통해 AI 비서가 컴프레스토 사용 현황에 대한 최신 통계에 접근할 수 있습니다.
Related MCP server: RL-MCP
MCP란 무엇인가요?
모델 컨텍스트 프로토콜(MCP)은 AI 시스템을 외부 도구 및 데이터 소스와 연결하는 표준입니다. 이 MCP 서버는 Compresto의 사용 통계에 대한 액세스를 제공하여 AI 기능을 확장합니다.
설치
지엑스피1
수동 구성
MCP 설정 파일에 다음을 추가하세요.
{
"mcpServers": {
"compresto": {
"command": "node",
"args": [
"/ABSOLUTE/PATH/TO/PARENT/FOLDER/compresto-mcp/build/index.js"
]
}
}
}호환되는 AI 어시스턴트와 통합되면 이 MCP 서버는 Compresto 사용에 대한 실시간 데이터를 제공합니다.
사용 가능한 도구
Compresto MCP 서버는 다음과 같은 도구를 제공합니다.
총 사용자 수 가져오기
Compresto 사용자의 총 수를 반환합니다.
응답 예시: 12345
전체 처리된 파일 가져오기
Compresto에서 처리한 총 파일 수를 반환합니다.
응답 예시: Processed 67890 files
전체 크기 줄이기
Compresto로 줄어든 파일 크기의 총량을 반환합니다.
응답 예시: Reduced 1234567890 bytes
개발
필수 조건
Node.js(v16 이상)
npm 또는 yarn
프로젝트 구조
src/index.ts- MCP 서버 구현을 포함하는 기본 진입점package.json- 프로젝트 종속성 및 스크립트tsconfig.json- TypeScript 구성
특허
MIT 라이센스
Available Tools
3 toolsget-total-processed-filesB
Get total processed files of Compresto
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
TDQS
B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5
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. It states what the tool does but doesn't reveal any behavioral traits such as whether it's read-only, requires authentication, has rate limits, or what the return format might be. This is a significant gap for a tool with zero 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 a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core purpose, making it highly concise and well-structured.
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?
Given the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate. It states the purpose but lacks behavioral context and usage guidance, making it incomplete for optimal agent understanding despite the low complexity.
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?
The input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description doesn't add parameter details, which is appropriate, earning a baseline score of 4 for tools with no parameters.
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 action ('Get') and resource ('total processed files of Compresto'), providing a specific purpose. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'get-total-size-reduced' or 'get-total-users', which would require explicit comparison to earn a 5.
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?
The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like the sibling tools. There's no mention of context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving usage entirely implicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
get-total-size-reducedC
Get total file size reduced of Compresto
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
TDQS
C2.9/5.0
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 of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool retrieves data ('Get'), implying a read-only operation, but doesn't specify if it requires authentication, has rate limits, returns real-time or historical data, or what format the output is in. The description lacks details on behavioral traits beyond the basic action.
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?
The description is a single, concise sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded and efficient, though it could be slightly more informative by clarifying terms like 'Compresto' and 'reduced' to improve clarity without sacrificing brevity.
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?
Given the tool has no parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate but incomplete. It explains what the tool does at a high level but lacks details on output format, data scope, or behavioral context. For a simple retrieval tool, this might suffice, but it leaves gaps in understanding the tool's full behavior and usage.
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?
The tool has 0 parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description doesn't add parameter information, which is appropriate here. A baseline of 4 is applied since there are no parameters to describe, and the schema fully covers this aspect.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose3/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states the action ('Get') and target ('total file size reduced of Compresto'), which is clear but vague. It doesn't specify what 'Compresto' is (e.g., a system, service, or dataset) or what 'reduced' means (e.g., compression, deduplication, or cleanup). It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on size reduction rather than processed files or users, but the purpose remains somewhat ambiguous.
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 is provided on when to use this tool versus its siblings. The description doesn't mention context, prerequisites, or alternatives. While it implies usage for monitoring size reduction metrics, there's no explicit direction on when it's appropriate or how it relates to other tools like 'get-total-processed-files' or 'get-total-users'.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
get-total-usersB
Get total users of Compresto
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
TDQS
B3.2/5.0
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 of behavioral disclosure. It states a read operation ('Get'), implying it's likely safe and non-destructive, but doesn't specify whether it requires authentication, has rate limits, returns real-time or cached data, or details about the output format. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its behavior.
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 a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any fluff or redundancy. It is front-loaded and wastes no words, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.
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?
Given the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate. It explains what the tool does but lacks details on behavioral traits and usage context. For a basic read tool, this might suffice, but it doesn't fully address potential agent needs like output format or integration with siblings.
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?
The input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description doesn't add parameter information, which is appropriate here. A baseline score of 4 is given since the schema fully handles parameters, and the description doesn't need to compensate for any gaps.
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 verb ('Get') and resource ('total users of Compresto'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on users rather than files or size reduction, though it doesn't explicitly contrast them. The description avoids tautology by specifying what is being retrieved.
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?
The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like its siblings (get-total-processed-files, get-total-size-reduced). It lacks context about use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage based solely on the tool name and description.
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.
3 tool updates
v1.0.0- First observed
get-total-processed-files - First observed
get-total-size-reduced - First observed
get-total-users
TDQS
B3.2/5.0
Scored across 3 tools
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: one retrieves processed file count, another gets size reduction data, and the third provides user count. There is no overlap in functionality, making it easy for an agent to select the correct tool without confusion.
Naming Consistency5/5
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with hyphens (e.g., get-total-processed-files, get-total-size-reduced, get-total-users). This uniformity enhances readability and predictability across the tool set.
Tool Count3/5
With only 3 tools, the set feels thin for a server named 'Compresto MCP', which might imply broader functionality. However, the tools are well-scoped for reporting metrics, so it's borderline but not severely lacking.
Completeness2/5
The tools only provide read-only metrics (get operations) with no ability to perform actions like processing files, managing users, or configuring settings. This creates significant gaps for a server that might be expected to handle file processing or user management tasks.
Maintenance
ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues
Related MCP Connectors
A comprehensive Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that enables AI assistants to interact with yo…
A Model Context Protocol server for Wix AI tools
The Dappier MCP server connects LLMs and AI agents to real-time, rights-cleared, proprietary data from trusted sources across various domains. It provides specialized knowledge through real-time web search, financial stock market and crypto data access, AI-powered content recommendations from premium publishers, and structured outputs with sub-300ms response times, enabling AI systems to respond to current events and trends.
The HubSpot MCP Server acts as a bridge that enables AI assistants and Large Language Models to securely interact with HubSpot CRM data through natural conversation, without requiring users to understand complex API structures. It provides read-only access to standard CRM objects (contacts, companies, deals, tickets, products, invoices, and more) and their associations, secured via OAuth 2.0, allowing AI agents to perform tasks like summarizing deals, fetching company updates, and looking up record changes.
Related MCP Servers
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol server that provides AI models with structured access to external data and services, acting as a bridge between AI assistants and applications, databases, and APIs in a standardized, secure way.2-
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceA comprehensive Model Context Protocol server that provides over 50 file and system management tools for AI models, including navigation, file operations, search, compression, and system information capabilities.-
- AlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceA model Context Protocol (MCP) server that provides comprehensive OECD statistics through the SDMX API, supporting AI assistants and chatbots to query OECD datasets in areas such as economy, health, education, and environment.92Apache 2.0