PPK2 MCP Server

by zhixuan2333

Overview Schema Related Servers Score Discussions

Python

Local

Server Quality Checklist

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

Latest release: v0.1.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool addresses a distinct aspect of PPK2 operation: configuration, disconnection, logic capture, current measurement, power control, and status reporting. There is no overlap in functionality.
Naming Consistency5/5
All tools follow a consistent `ppk2_<verb_or_noun>` pattern. The names clearly indicate their action (configure, disconnect, measure, power, status) or feature (logic), making them predictable.
Tool Count5/5
Six tools is a well-scoped set for a PPK2 hardware interface. Each tool maps to a required operation for using the device, without unnecessary bloat or missing essentials.
Completeness4/5
The tool set covers the full workflow: configure, power control, measurement, logic analysis, and cleanup. A very minor gap is the absence of a separate tool to read calibration data, but configure handles it implicitly.
Average 4.6/5 across 6 of 6 tools scored.
See the Tool Scores section below for per-tool breakdowns.
- No community issues in the last 6 months
- 2 commits in the last 12 weeks
- No stable releases found
- No critical vulnerability alerts
- No high-severity vulnerability alerts
- No code scanning findings
- CI is passing
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

Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Describes internal actions (enable/disable voltage, connect/disconnect switch) and prerequisite. No annotations provided, so description carries full burden; lacks details on side effects or state persistence.
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?
Front-loaded with main purpose, mode explanation, and prerequisite. Could be slightly more concise, but structure is clear.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness4/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Covers prerequisite, mode behavior, and parameter values. Output schema exists (not shown), so return value not needed. Adequate for a simple on/off tool.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters4/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Only parameter 'state' has no schema description; description provides valid values 'ON' or 'OFF' in Args, adding meaning beyond the schema's generic string type.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose5/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Clear verb and resource: 'Turn the DUT power output ON or OFF.' Explains behavior in source and ampere modes, and distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on power control.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines4/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
States prerequisite: requires `ppk2_configure` first. Explains mode-dependent behavior. Lacks explicit comparison to alternatives but provides sufficient context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description details the sampling process: starts sampling, discards a settling window, collects states for duration, and returns statistics. It also warns about unconnected pins floating. With no annotations, this provides reasonable behavioral context, though it does not state whether it is read-only or if it affects concurrent measurements.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness5/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is well-structured: a one-sentence purpose, followed by process explanation, a behavioral note, and a labeled Args list. Every sentence adds value, with no redundancy, fitting within a moderate length.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness5/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The description covers the prerequisite (ppk2_configure), the sampling process, parameter details, output structure (sample count, sample rate, channels map), and a behavioral note on floating pins. Given the presence of an output schema, this fully equips an agent to use the tool correctly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters5/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The description explains all five parameters: duration_seconds range (0.05–60), settle_ms default (100 ms), channels (0–7, default all), include_series (if true returns downsampled series), and series_points (target points). This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema, which has no descriptions.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose5/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description opens with a clear verb 'Capture' and specific resource 'PPK2's 8 digital logic channels (D0–D7)', immediately distinguishing it from sibling tools like ppk2_measure which focus on current/power. The mention of 'logic analyser' reinforces its purpose.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines3/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description states 'Requires a prior ppk2_configure', providing a necessary prerequisite. However, it does not explicitly advise when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., ppk2_measure for current-only analysis) or when not to use it. The context with siblings implies differentiation, but explicit guidance is missing.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Without annotations, the description properly discloses key behaviors: opens serial port if not already open, reads calibration, selects mode, sets voltage. It also describes mode-specific behavior (voltage_mv usage in ampere vs source). However, it doesn't mention error conditions or what happens on failure, though output schema may cover return values.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness5/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is concise and well-structured: a one-sentence summary, followed by detailed behavioral steps, then clear argument explanations. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness4/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The description covers the main function, all parameters, usage sequence, and mode-specific behavior. Output schema exists for return format. Minor omission: no mention of behavior on repeated calls or error handling, but overall it's sufficiently complete for a configuration tool.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters5/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema has 0% description coverage, but the description adds extensive meaning: mode options with detailed explanations (external vs source), voltage_mv range (800-5000) and purpose, port override mechanism. This fully compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose5/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states 'Open the PPK2 and configure it for measurement' with specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings by mentioning 'Call this before `ppk2_measure`' and referencing `ppk2_power` for enabling output, making its unique role evident.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines5/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description explicitly says 'Call this before `ppk2_measure`' and explains when to use each mode ('ampere' vs 'source'), including that 'ampere' mode requires external supply and 'source' mode needs `ppk2_power("ON")`. This provides clear context for usage and alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Behavior5/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: it starts continuous sampling, discards a settling window, collects samples, stops, and computes statistics. It reveals the sampling rate (~100k samples/s), that raw samples are never returned by default, and explains the downsampled series option. Returns are detailed with units.
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 well-structured with an introductory sentence, process flow, parameter list, and return description. While comprehensive, it maintains clarity without excessive verbosity. The use of bullet points for arguments and clear sectioning earns a high score, though a slight reduction for minor redundancies (e.g., 'Args:' could be more compact).
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness5/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given no annotations and the tool's complexity (hardware interaction, prerequisite, high-frequency sampling), the description is remarkably complete. It covers prerequisites, process, parameter constraints, return values, and edge cases (settling window). The presence of an output schema further supports completeness.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters5/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The schema description coverage is 0%, but the description fully compensates: it defines each parameter with purpose, defaults, ranges (duration_seconds: 0.05–60, settle_ms: default 200), and semantics (include_series as a flag, series_points as target count). This adds significant meaning beyond the schema fields.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose5/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb ('Sample') and a clear resource ('current') with scope ('for a fixed duration and return summary statistics'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like ppk2_configure (setup) and ppk2_power (power control) by describing a measurement action.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines4/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description explicitly states the prerequisite ('Requires a prior ppk2_configure') and outlines the process (continuous sampling, settling window, collection, stopping). It implies when to use (after configuration) but does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternative tools, though the sibling context provides differentiation.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Behavior5/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It fully discloses behavioral traits: non-destructive (never opens the port), returns specific state fields, and is safe to call anytime. No contradictions.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness5/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences with no filler. Lists all returned fields efficiently. Front-loads purpose in first sentence. Every word earns its place.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness5/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple status tool with output schema and no parameters, the description fully covers what the tool does, when to use it, and its behavioral transparency. Complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters4/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Input schema has 0 parameters, so baseline is 4. Description does not add parameter info because none exist, which is appropriate. No need for further elaboration.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose5/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description clearly states it reports PPK2 connection and configuration state, listing specific return fields. Differentiates from sibling tools which are action-oriented (configure, disconnect, measure, etc.).
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines4/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicitly says 'Safe to call any time; never opens the port,' indicating it's non-destructive and can be used for pre-checks. Lacks explicit when-not or alternatives, but the sibling list provides context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Behavior5/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Discloses that the tool stops sampling and drops DUT power before releasing the port. Also notes that the next tool call will reopen the port. This provides important behavioral context beyond just 'disconnect', which is critical for a hardware tool.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness5/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is two sentences, both front-loaded with the core action and purpose. Every sentence is useful and there is no waste. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness5/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given zero parameters and an existing output schema, the description covers all necessary context: what it does, when to use it, side effects (drops DUT power, stops sampling), and lifecycle hint (next call reopens). No gaps.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters4/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
There are no parameters, so the description does not need to add parameter semantics. The baseline of 4 is appropriate as the schema coverage is 100% and there is nothing to explain.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose5/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states that the tool releases the serial port, stops sampling, and drops DUT power. It also provides the purpose: to hand the port to another process or recover from a wedged connection. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ppk2_configure or ppk2_measure.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines5/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicitly says when to use: to hand the port to another process or recover from a wedged connection. It also implies that after disconnecting, the next tool call will reopen, which helps the agent understand the lifecycle.
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:

[![PPK2-MCP MCP server](https://glama.ai/mcp/servers/zhixuan2333/PPK2-MCP/badges/card.svg)](https://glama.ai/mcp/servers/zhixuan2333/PPK2-MCP)

Score Badge

Copy to your README.md:

[![PPK2-MCP MCP server](https://glama.ai/mcp/servers/zhixuan2333/PPK2-MCP/badges/score.svg)](https://glama.ai/mcp/servers/zhixuan2333/PPK2-MCP)

Latest Blog Posts

Who's Calling? MCP Hosts Are an Identity Blind Spot (And the Spec Knows It)
By Om-Shree-0709 on July 25, 2026.
mcp
Agent Identity
OAuth 2.1
Your AI Chatbot Just Exposed Your CEO's Salary to an Intern
By Om-Shree-0709 on July 2, 2026.
Agent Identity
MCP Security
OAuth Delegation
Why MCP Servers Need Execution Sandboxing (And Why Your Current Stack Isn't Enough)
By Om-Shree-0709 on June 30, 2026.
Agentic Ai
Prompt Injection
WebAssembly

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/zhixuan2333/PPK2-MCP'

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