MCP Workbench MCP Server
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| MCP_WORKBENCH_CLI | No | Path to the mcp-workbench binary if it is not available on your PATH. |
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| inspect_serverB | Connect to an MCP server and inspect its capabilities, version, and supported features. |
| generate_specB | Generate a YAML test spec by discovering the capabilities of an MCP server. Returns a ready-to-run spec. |
| run_specA | Run a YAML test spec against an MCP server and return results. Provide either specText (inline YAML) or specPath (path to a file). At least one is required. |
| explain_failureA | Analyze test run results and explain failures with heuristic classification and actionable recommendations. Pass the structured result from run_spec. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 4 tools
Each tool has a distinct purpose: inspect_server discovers server capabilities, generate_spec creates test specs, run_spec executes them, and explain_failure analyzes results. No overlap, clear boundaries.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with snake_case (e.g., inspect_server, generate_spec). No mixing of conventions.
With 4 tools, the set is well-scoped for a test workbench: inspect, generate, run, explain. Each tool is essential and the count is neither too few nor too many.
The tool surface covers the core workflow (inspect, generate spec, run spec, explain failures) with no critical gaps. Minor missing features like spec validation or listing are acceptable.