ssh-mcp-pro

Execute Streaming Command

proc_exec_stream

Execute a command over SSH and stream its output chunk by chunk for real-time processing.

Instructions

Executes a command and returns streaming output chunks

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "sessionId": "<sessionId>",
      "command": "<command>"
    },
    "name": "proc_exec_stream"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`cwd`	No	Working directory
`env`	No	Environment variables
`command`	Yes	Command to execute
`sessionId`	Yes	SSH session ID
`timeoutMs`	No	Streaming command timeout in milliseconds

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`code`	Yes
`chunks`	Yes
`stderr`	Yes
`stdout`	Yes
`truncated`	Yes
`durationMs`	Yes
`safetyWarning`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.1.5Jun 28, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations provide basic safety hints; description adds 'streaming output chunks' but omits details on side effects, error states, or authentication requirements.

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?

Single sentence is efficient and conveys the core purpose, though it lacks detail that would help with tool selection.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a tool with 5 parameters and streaming behavior, the description is insufficiently complete; no mention of session dependency, output format, or timeout implications.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema covers all parameters with descriptions; the tool description adds no additional parameter-level information, so baseline score applies.

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?

Description clearly states it executes a command and returns streaming output chunks, distinguishing it from non-streaming alternatives like proc_exec.

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 on when to use this tool versus siblings (e.g., proc_exec for non-streaming), nor any context about prerequisites or exclusions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.