A
licenseA
qualityD
maintenanceA stdio MCP proxy that connects to one or more upstream MCP servers and exposes their tools, resources, and prompts through a single endpoint with a configurable middleware pipeline.
14
16
3
MIT
MCP Compact
by quan2005
Click on "Install Server".
Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state.
In the chat, type
@followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@MCP Compactinvoke filesystem to list /tmp"
That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed.
Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.
MCP Compact
MCP Compact aggregates multiple upstream MCP servers into one stdio-only runtime with a single compact surface.
What It Is
MCP Compact runs as one MCP server over stdio and exposes only invoke and read.
Related MCP server: Crabeye MCP Bridge
Use From An MCP Client
MCP Compact runs as a stdio MCP server. It does not expose HTTP or /mcp.
Configure your MCP client to launch it like this:
{
"mcpServers": {
"mcp_compact": {
"command": "uv",
"args": ["run", "mcp-compact", "config.example.json"]
}
}
}If you want to start it manually, run:
uv run mcp-compact config.example.jsonUpstream Config
config.example.json is the config file consumed by mcp-compact itself:
{
"mcpServers": {
"filesystem": {
"command": "npx",
"args": ["-y", "@modelcontextprotocol/server-filesystem", "/tmp"]
}
}
}All upstreams must use stdio.
Test
uv run ruff check src/mcp_compact tests
uv run mypy src/mcp_compact
uv run pytest tests/ -qAvailable Tools
2 toolsinvokeC
Invoke an MCP tool through the compact projection surface.
Use ref.server and ref.name with canonical upstream identifiers.
Use mode="validate" to inspect input requirements before calling.
Available tool families:
Example: invoke(ref={"server": "notes", "name": "echo_note"}, arguments={"title": "...", "body": "..."})
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ref | Yes | ||
| mode | No | call | |
| arguments | No |
Output Schema
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
TDQS
C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so the description carries full responsibility. It fails to disclose that invoking arbitrary MCP tools could have side effects (destructive or otherwise), and it doesn't explain the 'compact projection surface' or what happens on invocation. The validate mode is a positive safety hint, but overall behavioral risk is understated.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness2/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is short but structurally flawed by the incomplete 'Available tool families:' line. It uses jargon like 'compact projection surface' without elaboration. The flow is disjointed, moving from invocation to identifiers to an example, making it less coherent than it could be.
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?
While an output schema exists, the description does not clarify how the output relates to the invoked tool (e.g., passthrough vs. wrap), nor does it explain the 'compact projection surface' or enumerate available tool families. The missing list of tool families is a major completeness gap for a proxy tool.
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?
Since schema coverage is 0%, the description adds meaning for `ref` (server/name) and `mode` (validate for inspection). The `arguments` parameter is only exemplified, not fully explained. This is helpful but incomplete for a generic tool with three 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 tool invokes an MCP tool ('Invoke an MCP tool through the compact projection surface') and provides a concrete example (invoke with notes/echo_note). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'read', and the dangling 'Available tool families:' line introduces ambiguity.
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?
Provides specific guidance on constructing the ref object ('Use `ref.server` and `ref.name`') and using validate mode ('Use `mode="validate"` to inspect input requirements'). It does not explain when to use this tool versus the 'read' sibling, and the incomplete list of tool families offers no exclusionary guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
readA
Read MCP resources through the compact projection surface.
Use ref.server with either ref.uri for direct resources or
ref.uriTemplate plus template arguments for resource templates.
Use mode="preview" before reading when you need metadata first.
Direct resources:
none
Resource templates:
none
Example: read(ref={"server": "notes", "uriTemplate": "memo://notes/{slug}", "arguments": {"slug": "welcome"}}, mode="read")
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ref | Yes | ||
| mode | No | read |
Output Schema
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
TDQS
A4.1/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavior. It explains the modes and the reference structure, but it confusingly states "Direct resources: none" and "Resource templates: none" while the example uses a URI template, creating ambiguity. It also does not mention error behavior or response details, leaving behaviors unexplained.
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 well-organized and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by usage instructions and an example. The "Direct resources: none" and "Resource templates: none" lines add confusion and seem unnecessary, slightly detracting from conciseness.
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?
Despite the presence of an output schema, the description fails to resolve the contradiction between the "none" resource lists and the example. It provides sufficient guidance for a basic call, but the contradictory statements leave gaps in understanding the tool's actual capabilities, so it is not fully complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters5/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Since schema coverage is 0%, the description compensates well by explaining the layout of the `ref` object, including `server`, `uri`, `uriTemplate`, and `arguments`, and shows a concrete usage example. The `mode` parameter is also given context (default "read", "preview" for metadata).
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?
The description clearly identifies the tool as reading MCP resources through a projection surface, with explicit instructions for using ref.uri and ref.uriTemplate. It differentiates from sibling invoke by focusing on reading rather than executing/invoking, giving it a distinct purpose.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines4/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description gives concrete usage directions: how to construct ref.server with uri or uriTemplate, and when to use mode="preview" for metadata. However, it does not explicitly state when to avoid this tool or compare it to `invoke`, so it misses the full "when-not" guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
TDQS
A3.5/5.0
Disambiguation4/5
The two tools are clearly separated by purpose: invoke handles tool calls and read handles resource access. The descriptions provide explicit examples and modes to guide usage, though the generic proxy nature could occasionally blur the line between a tool and a resource.
Naming Consistency5/5
Both tool names are single-word verbs in a consistent imperative style, making them predictable and easy to remember. There is no mixing of conventions or misleading synonyms.
Tool Count4/5
With only two tools, the set is intentionally minimal but well-suited for a compact projection surface that forwards to a larger MCP ecosystem. While it feels thin compared to direct-integration servers, its purpose justifies the small count.
Completeness3/5
The server covers the core interaction patterns (invoking tools and reading resources) and includes validation/preview modes. However, it lacks an explicit discovery mechanism to list available servers, tools, or resource templates, which could be a significant gap for agents without prior knowledge.
Maintenance
ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessSyncing
Resources
Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.
Looking for Admin?
If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.
Related MCP Connectors
MCP Gateway: wrap any MCP server with cold-start retries, uptime SLA, and per-execution MPP billing.
MCP server for Superserve sandboxes: create, exec, and manage Firecracker microVMs
Remote MCP server exposing SMI Aware tools, resources, and skills over Streamable HTTP.
MCP server for progressive tool usage at any scale (see https://klavis.ai)
Related MCP Servers
Crabeye MCP Bridgeofficial
AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceConsolidates multiple upstream MCP servers behind a single STDIO interface, exposing search_tools and run_tool to avoid context bloat.7214MIT- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceAggregates multiple MCP servers behind a single stdio interface, supporting stdio-based and HTTP SSE-based upstreams with OAuth.9MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceAggregates multiple child MCP servers into a single MCP server endpoint, enabling clients to use various tools (e.g., filesystem, Brave Search) through one interface.34
Latest Blog Posts
- Who's Calling? MCP Hosts Are an Identity Blind Spot (And the Spec Knows It)By Om-Shree-0709 on .mcpAgent IdentityOAuth 2.1
- Your AI Chatbot Just Exposed Your CEO's Salary to an InternBy Om-Shree-0709 on .Agent IdentityMCP SecurityOAuth Delegation
- Why MCP Servers Need Execution Sandboxing (And Why Your Current Stack Isn't Enough)By Om-Shree-0709 on .Agentic AiPrompt InjectionWebAssembly
MCP directory API
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/quan2005/mcp-compact'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server