A
licenseB
qualityC
maintenanceEnables AI agents to intercept, inspect, modify, and replay HTTP, WebSocket, TCP, and UDP traffic through mitmproxy, with controlled security constraints and process isolation.
18
AGPL 3.0
mitmproxy-mcp
by snapspecter
Related Servers
Alternatives to mitmproxy-mcp
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- FlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceA lightweight MCP server built on mitmproxy that lets LLMs capture, inspect, replay, and modify HTTP traffic through a set of focused tools.137-
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables Claude Code to inspect, modify, and block HTTP traffic via mitmproxy, with tools for flow capture, filtering, and rule creation.1-
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceEnables AI agents to interact with Charles Proxy for HTTP traffic analysis, supporting incremental harvest, checkpoint timelines, and rich filtering tools.138MIT
- AlicenseBqualityBmaintenanceEnables AI agents to connect to Charles Proxy for live and historical traffic analysis, summary-first insights, request detail inspection, and data-driven mock creation via Map Local/Remote.47MIT
- FlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceRuns a local HTTPS MITM proxy to intercept and mock network traffic from Android devices at the network level, enabling AI agents to register JSON transform rules and static responses without modifying app source code.2113 npm-
TDQS
C2.6/5.0
Scored across 25 tools
Disambiguation4/5
Most tools target a distinct action or resource: proxy lifecycle, traffic inspection, extraction, replay, rules, and export are clearly separated. The main ambiguities are the blank descriptions for several tools (get_traffic_summary, set_scope, detect_auth_pattern, etc.) and the close relationship between extract_from_flow and extract_session_variable, though their purposes are still distinct.
Naming Consistency5/5
Every tool follows a consistent snake_case verb_noun convention: start_proxy/stop_proxy, inspect_flow/inspect_flows, set_scope, clear_traffic, replay_flow, fuzz_endpoint. Even compound operations like export_openapi_spec and generate_scraper_code fit the pattern cleanly. No naming convention mixing or vague single-word verbs exist.
Tool Count3/5
At 25 tools, this sits right at the upper boundary of acceptable size for a proxy/HTTP traffic analysis server. The breadth is mostly justified by the many sub-domains (capture, inspection, extraction, replay, rules, export), but several tools have minimal descriptions and could potentially be consolidated. It is not egregiously over-scoped, but it feels heavy.
Completeness4/5
The tool surface covers the full proxy workflow: start/stop, traffic capture, import, search, inspection, schema inference, extraction, session variables, replay, fuzzing, code generation, and OpenAPI export. Minor gaps exist such as no per-flow deletion, no rule editing beyond add/list/clear, and no obvious way to export raw traffic back out, but agents can work around these.
Maintenance
ActivityMaintained
ResponsivenessSlow