cmd-mcp-server
Server Quality Checklist
Latest release: v1.0.0
- Disambiguation5/5
The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: execute_command handles local shell commands, while execute_ssh_command handles remote SSH commands. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them, as each targets a different execution environment.
Naming Consistency5/5Both tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with 'execute_' as the prefix and descriptive suffixes ('command' and 'ssh_command'). The naming is perfectly uniform and predictable across the tool set.
Tool Count2/5With only 2 tools, the server feels thin for a command execution domain. It lacks essential operations like listing available commands, managing sessions, or handling file operations, which are common in such contexts. The count is too low for adequate coverage.
Completeness2/5The tool set is severely incomplete for command execution. It covers basic local and remote command execution but misses critical functionalities such as session management tools, command history, file transfer, or environment configuration, leaving significant gaps for agent workflows.
Average 3.4/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.
See the Tool Scores section below for per-tool breakdowns.
- No issues in the last 6 months
- No commit activity data available
- No stable releases found
- No critical vulnerability alerts
- No high-severity vulnerability alerts
- No code scanning findings
- CI status not available
This repository is licensed under MIT License.
This repository includes a README.md file.
No tool usage detected in the last 30 days. Usage tracking helps demonstrate server value.
Tip: use the "Try in Browser" feature on the server page to seed initial usage.
Add a glama.json file to provide metadata about your server.
This server has been verified by its author.
Add related servers to improve discoverability.
How to sync the server with GitHub?
Servers are automatically synced at least once per day, but you can also sync manually at any time to instantly update the server profile.
To manually sync the server, click the "Sync Server" button in the MCP server admin interface.
How is the quality score calculated?
The overall quality score combines two components: Tool Definition Quality (70%) and Server Coherence (30%).
Tool Definition Quality measures how well each tool describes itself to AI agents. Every tool is scored 1–5 across six dimensions: Purpose Clarity (25%), Usage Guidelines (20%), Behavioral Transparency (20%), Parameter Semantics (15%), Conciseness & Structure (10%), and Contextual Completeness (10%). The server-level definition quality score is calculated as 60% mean TDQS + 40% minimum TDQS, so a single poorly described tool pulls the score down.
Server Coherence evaluates how well the tools work together as a set, scoring four dimensions equally: Disambiguation (can agents tell tools apart?), Naming Consistency, Tool Count Appropriateness, and Completeness (are there gaps in the tool surface?).
Tiers are derived from the overall score: A (≥3.5), B (≥3.0), C (≥2.0), D (≥1.0), F (<1.0). B and above is considered passing.
Tool Scores
- Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions the persistent session behavior and newSession option, which is helpful. However, it doesn't cover critical aspects like security implications, error handling, timeout behavior, or output format. For a tool that executes remote commands with authentication parameters, this leaves significant gaps.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness4/5Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is appropriately concise with two sentences. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second provides important behavioral context about session persistence. No wasted words, though it could be more comprehensive given the tool's complexity.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness2/5Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a tool with 7 parameters, 0% schema description coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain authentication methods (password vs. privateKey), command execution context, error scenarios, or return values. The description should provide more guidance given the tool's security-sensitive nature and complexity.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters2/5Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for all 7 parameters. The description only mentions the 'newSession' parameter explicitly. It doesn't explain the purpose or relationships of host, port, username, password, privateKey, or command parameters. The description adds minimal value beyond what the bare schema provides.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose4/5Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Execute a command on a remote server via SSH.' It specifies the action (execute), resource (remote server), and method (SSH). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'execute_command' (which might be for local execution or different protocols).
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines3/5Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides some usage context: 'Commands run in a persistent SSH session by default. Use newSession: true to run in a new session.' This gives guidance on session behavior but doesn't explain when to use this tool versus the sibling 'execute_command' or address authentication method selection (password vs. privateKey).
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
- Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that commands run in a persistent shell session by default and can be run in a new instance, which is useful behavioral context. However, it lacks details on permissions, security implications, error handling, or output format, which are important for a command execution tool.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness5/5Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is appropriately sized and front-loaded, with two clear sentences that efficiently convey key information without waste. Each sentence earns its place by explaining the core function and a critical parameter behavior.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool's complexity (command execution with potential security and behavioral implications), no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It covers the basic operation and session behavior but lacks details on permissions, error handling, output structure, or safety warnings, which are crucial for such a tool.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters4/5Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning by explaining the 'newSession' parameter's effect (running in a new shell instance vs. default persistent session) and implies 'command' is the input to execute. It doesn't detail the 'command' parameter's format or constraints, but provides enough context for basic usage.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose4/5Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Execute') and resource ('a command'), and specifies it returns output. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'execute_ssh_command' tool, which likely has a different context or target.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines4/5Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides clear context about when to use the 'newSession' parameter (to run in a new shell instance vs. the default persistent session). It doesn't explicitly mention when to use this tool versus the sibling 'execute_ssh_command' or other alternatives, which is a minor gap.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
GitHub Badge
Glama performs regular codebase and documentation scans to:
- Confirm that the MCP server is working as expected.
- Confirm that there are no obvious security issues.
- Evaluate tool definition quality.
Our badge communicates server capabilities, safety, and installation instructions.
Card Badge
Copy to your README.md:
Score Badge
Copy to your README.md:
Latest Blog Posts
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/PhialsBasement/CMD-MCP-Server'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server