A
licenseA
qualityD
maintenanceA Python code execution sandbox based on IPython and Docker. Stateful code execution, file transfer between host and container, configurable network access.
4
73
Apache 2.0
MCE — MCP Code Execution
by hypen-code
Related Servers
Alternatives to MCE — MCP Code Execution
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables LLMs to safely execute code in isolated Docker containers with resource limits and security controls, supporting session management and automatic dependency installation.MIT
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceEnables AI coding agents to safely run commands, install dependencies, test, and modify code inside disposable, policy-enforced Docker sandboxes isolated from the host, returning results and diffs.15MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables secure execution of Python code, SQL queries, and metric fetching through MCP with ephemeral Docker sandboxing.-
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables executing Python code, managing environments and packages, and performing file operations within Docker containers.-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceAn interactive Python code execution environment that allows users and LLMs to safely execute Python code and install packages in isolated Docker containers.40Apache 2.0
TDQS
A3.9/5.0
Scored across 11 tools
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool targets a distinct operation: search/get/list for discovery, execute/submit/cached for running code, and dedicated tools for run management and artifact access. Even execute_code and submit_code are clearly differentiated by synchronous execution vs. persistent receipt submission.
Naming Consistency5/5
All 11 tool names follow the snake_case verb_noun pattern, such as search_functions, cancel_run, and transform_artifact. The pattern is consistent across discovery, execution, and artifact operations, with no mixing of conventions.
Tool Count5/5
With 11 tools, the server is well-scoped for its purpose: it covers function discovery, code execution variants, run lifecycle, and artifact handling without excess. The count is within the ideal range and each tool serves a clear role.
Completeness4/5
The surface covers the main workflow well: discovering functions, executing code, managing runs, and reading/transforming artifacts. A minor gap is the lack of a list_runs tool to enumerate persistent runs; callers must know a receipt ID upfront, which is a small workaround.
Maintenance
ActivityMaintained
ResponsivenessNo issues