Debug Companion MCP
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| GEMINI_API_KEY | No | Enable Gemini analysis (optional) | |
| MCP_ALLOWED_ROOTS | No | Allow access to absolute paths outside the server root (optional) |
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 | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| prompts | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| resources | {
"subscribe": false,
"listChanged": false
} |
| experimental | {} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| pingD | – |
| run_pytestD | – |
| extract_failuresD | – |
| open_contextD | – |
| analyze_error_with_geminiD | – |
| debug_projectD | – |
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 6 tools
Most tools have distinct purposes: analyze_error_with_gemini focuses on error analysis using Gemini, debug_project handles general debugging, extract_failures isolates test failures, open_context manages context, ping checks connectivity, and run_pytest runs tests. However, debug_project and analyze_error_with_gemini could overlap in error-related tasks, causing minor confusion.
The naming is mixed: analyze_error_with_gemini and open_context use snake_case with descriptive names, while ping and run_pytest are simpler verbs. There's no consistent verb_noun pattern, but the names are readable and mostly action-oriented, albeit with some variation in style.
With 6 tools, this server is well-scoped for debugging and testing support. Each tool appears to serve a specific function in the debugging workflow, and the count is neither too sparse nor bloated, fitting typical MCP server ranges.
For a debugging companion, the tools cover key areas like error analysis, test execution, and context management. However, there are notable gaps: no tools for logging, monitoring, or step-through debugging, which could limit agent effectiveness in complex debugging scenarios.