E2B MCP Server

execute_python

Execute Python code in a secure E2B sandbox to test scripts, manage files, and install packages without affecting your local environment.

Instructions

Execute Python code in an E2B sandbox environment

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": {
      "code": "<code>"
    },
    "name": "execute_python"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`code`	Yes	Python code to execute
`sandbox_id`	No	Optional sandbox ID to use specific sandbox

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Aug 30, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'execute Python code in a sandbox', without mentioning side effects, sandbox persistence, execution timeouts, network/filesystem access, or whether the environment is ephemeral. For an arbitrary code execution tool this is a significant gap.

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 clear, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is concise, though it could arguably include more behavioral context without becoming bloated.

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 that executes arbitrary code, this description is too minimal. With no annotations and no output schema, the agent is left unaware of return values, execution limits, environment behavior, or risk considerations, making the definition incomplete for safe and correct invocation.

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?

The input schema covers both parameters with clear descriptions, so the schema already provides the needed semantic meaning. The description adds no extra parameter detail, which is acceptable under the high schema coverage baseline.

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 states a specific verb ('Execute') and resource ('Python code in an E2B sandbox environment'). It clearly distinguishes this from sibling execute_javascript by language, though it does not elaborate on broader sandbox capabilities.

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 for Python execution, which differentiates it from execute_javascript, but it provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives like create_file, list_files, or install_packages. Context is present, but exclusions and alternative routing are absent.

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

Deploy Server