Skip to main content
Glama
yunhai-dev

exec-dir-mcp

by yunhai-dev
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
Python

Server Quality Checklist

42%
Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.

  • Latest release: v1.0.2

  • Disambiguation4/5

    With only one tool, there is no risk of confusion or misselection between tools. The single tool has a clear, singular purpose of executing commands in a specified directory.

    Naming Consistency3/5

    With only one tool, there is no pattern to assess beyond the single name itself. 'execute_command' is a reasonable verb_noun name, but consistency cannot truly be evaluated with a single data point.

    Tool Count2/5

    A server with a single tool feels extremely thin for a directory-execution MCP server. One would expect at least listing directory contents, reading files, or inspecting the environment alongside command execution.

    Completeness2/5

    The tool provides command execution, but a directory-execution server would plausibly benefit from related operations like listing directory contents, checking working directory, or managing paths. With only execute_command, the surface is quite limited and likely to create dead ends.

  • Average 2.4/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.

    See the Tool Scores section below for per-tool breakdowns.

    • No community issues in the last 6 months
    • 0 commits in the last 12 weeks
    • No stable releases found
    • No critical vulnerability alerts
    • No high-severity vulnerability alerts
    • No code scanning findings
    • CI status not available

  • Add a LICENSE file by following GitHub's guide. Once GitHub recognizes the license, the system will automatically detect it within a few hours.

    If the license does not appear after some time, you can manually trigger a new scan using the MCP server admin interface.

    MCP servers without a LICENSE cannot be installed.

  • 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.

  • If you are the author, simply .

    If the server belongs to an organization, first add glama.json to the root of your repository:

    {
  "$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/server.json",
  "maintainers": [
    "your-github-username"
  ]
}

    Then . Browse examples.

  • 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?

    No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. Executing arbitrary shell commands is a powerful, potentially destructive operation, yet the description doesn't disclose side effects, permissions required, whether commands run as privileged user, or any safety caveats. This is a significant gap 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.

    Conciseness4/5

    Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

    The description is extremely brief (one sentence), which is efficient, but at the cost of substance. It's front-loaded with the core purpose and the default directory. Minimal waste, but oversimplified.

    Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

    Completeness2/5

    Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

    For a shell command execution tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't describe return values/output capture, exit code handling, whether stderr/stdout are returned, or error behavior under failures. A command runner needs substantially more behavioral documentation for an agent to use it safely and correctly.

    Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

    Parameters2/5

    Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

    Schema coverage is 100%, so all three parameters (command, timeout, working_dir) are documented in the schema. However, the description adds essentially no meaning beyond the schema—it only restates the default working directory. It doesn't clarify timeout semantics (what happens on timeout), command syntax expectations, or how working_dir interacts with the default.

    Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

    Purpose3/5

    Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

    The description accurately states it executes commands in a specified folder, which conveys the basic verb+resource purpose. However, it lacks a specific action verb beyond 'execute' and there are no sibling tools to differentiate against, so it's clear but minimal.

    Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

    Usage Guidelines2/5

    Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

    No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, and there are no sibling tools to reference. It doesn't mention when command execution is appropriate, security considerations, or scenarios where this tool would be the right choice.

    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

exec-dir-mcp MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

exec-dir-mcp MCP server

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/yunhai-dev/exec-dir-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server