Skip to main content
Glama
wesleyzhangwq

tiny-agent-sandbox

by wesleyzhangwq
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

Related Servers

Alternatives to tiny-agent-sandbox

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • opencode-sandbox

      hsb3
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Spins up isolated opencode instances in Docker containers as MCP servers, providing 80 tools for file and shell operations within a scoped workspace without exposing the host filesystem.
      266
      MIT

    • Sandbox Agent

      eduresser
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables code execution in isolated Docker containers with persistent IPython, Node.js, or R kernels, supporting file import/export and cross-session transfers via MCP tools.
      6
      MIT

    • cm_mcp_engine

      jamalla
      F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Turns approved contracts into runnable code, sandboxes it, caches it, and serves the result as MCP tools. It executes tool names and arguments without making decisions.
      -

    • dynamic-mcp

      mcpland
      A
      license
      B
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Dynamic MCP server for Node.js enabling runtime tool creation, management, and execution in isolated sandboxes (Docker or Node).
      8
      20
      1
      MIT
    Deploy Server
    RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

    TDQS

    A3.8/5.0

    Scored across 2 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    The two tools serve clearly distinct purposes: run_code executes code while sandbox_status reports environment readiness. There is no meaningful overlap between them, so an agent can easily distinguish which to use.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Both tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern: run_code and sandbox_status. The naming style is uniform snake_case with clear, descriptive verbs and nouns.

    Tool Count3/5

    With only 2 tools, the surface feels thin for a sandbox server that presumably supports code execution. A richer surface might include file operations, image management, or environment configuration, but for a narrowly-scoped execution sandbox two tools can be reasonable.

    Completeness3/5

    The core execute-and-check lifecycle is covered: run code and check readiness. However, there are notable gaps such as no image listing, no stop/cleanup of sandboxes, and no way to provision or configure runtimes beyond status reporting.

    Maintenance

    ActivitySlowing
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources