Click on "Install Server".
Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state.
In the chat, type @ followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@Onecompiler APIs MCP Server run this Python code to calculate factorial of 5"
That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed.
Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.
用于访问 Onecompiler Apis API 的 MCP 服务器。
EMCP 是一个强大的 MCP 服务器管理平台，让您无需手动配置即可快速使用各种 MCP 服务器！
🌐 访问 EMCP 平台
📝 注册并登录账号
🎯 进入 MCP 广场，浏览所有可用的 MCP 服务器
🔍 搜索或找到本服务器（bach-onecompiler_apis）
🎉 点击 "安装 MCP" 按钮
✅ 完成！即可在您的应用中使用
✨ 零配置：无需手动编辑配置文件
🎨 可视化管理：图形界面轻松管理所有 MCP 服务器
🔐 安全可靠：统一管理 API 密钥和认证信息
🚀 一键安装：MCP 广场提供丰富的服务器选择
📊 使用统计：实时查看服务调用情况
立即访问 EMCP 平台 开始您的 MCP 之旅！
Related MCP server: Sandbox Agent
这是一个 MCP 服务器，用于访问 Onecompiler Apis API。
PyPI 包名: bach-onecompiler_apis
版本: 1.0.0
传输协议: stdio
pip install bach-onecompiler_apispip install -e .# 运行（uvx 会自动安装并运行）
uvx --from bach-onecompiler_apis bach_onecompiler_apis
# 或指定版本
uvx --from bach-onecompiler_apis@latest bach_onecompiler_apispython server.py# 安装
pip install bach-onecompiler_apis
# 运行（命令名使用下划线）
bach_onecompiler_apis此 API 需要认证。请设置环境变量:
export API_KEY="your_api_key_here"变量名 | 说明 | 必需 |
| API 密钥 | 是 |
| 不适用 | 否 |
| 不适用 | 否 |
编辑 Cursor MCP 配置文件 ~/.cursor/mcp.json:
{
"mcpServers": {
"bach-onecompiler_apis": {
"command": "uvx",
"args": ["--from", "bach-onecompiler_apis", "bach_onecompiler_apis"],
"env": {
"API_KEY": "your_api_key_here"
}
}
}
}编辑 Claude Desktop 配置文件 claude_desktop_config.json:
{
"mcpServers": {
"bach-onecompiler_apis": {
"command": "uvx",
"args": ["--from", "bach-onecompiler_apis", "bach_onecompiler_apis"],
"env": {
"API_KEY": "your_api_key_here"
}
}
}
}此服务器提供以下工具:
execute_codeExecute Code with 70+ languages \u0026 Databases
端点: POST /api/v1/run
传输协议: stdio
HTTP 客户端: httpx
MIT License - 详见 LICENSE 文件。
此服务器由 API-to-MCP 工具生成。
版本: 1.0.0
Execute Code with 70+ languages \u0026 Databases
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
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. However, it only states the action ('Execute Code') without detailing traits like safety (e.g., whether it's read-only or destructive), performance (e.g., timeouts, rate limits), authentication needs, or output behavior. This leaves critical behavioral aspects unspecified, making it inadequate for informed tool selection.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is concise with a single sentence that directly states the tool's function. It is front-loaded and wastes no words, though it could be slightly more specific. The structure is efficient, but the lack of detail limits its overall effectiveness despite the brevity.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the complexity implied by executing code across multiple languages and databases, the description is incomplete. It lacks annotations, has no output schema, and provides minimal behavioral context. This leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool operates, what it returns, and under what conditions it should be used, making it insufficient for a tool of this potential scope.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, meaning no parameters are defined or required. The description does not add any parameter information, which is appropriate since there are none to document. This aligns with the baseline expectation for zero parameters, where minimal description suffices.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description 'Execute Code with 70+ languages & Databases' states a general purpose but is vague about the specific action and resource. It mentions 'Execute Code' as the verb but doesn't clarify what 'Execute' entails (e.g., run, compile, evaluate) or what 'Code' refers to (e.g., scripts, queries, snippets). The mention of '70+ languages & Databases' adds scope but doesn't make the purpose specific or distinguish from hypothetical siblings, as there are none provided.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks context about scenarios where execution is appropriate, prerequisites, or exclusions. With no sibling tools, it doesn't need to differentiate, but it still fails to offer any usage instructions, leaving the agent without direction on application.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
v1.0.0execute_codeWith only one tool, there is no possibility of ambiguity or overlap between tools. The single tool 'execute_code' has a clearly defined and distinct purpose.
The naming is trivially consistent as there is only one tool. It follows a clear verb_noun pattern ('execute_code'), which would be a good standard if more tools were added.
A single tool is too few for a server named 'Onecompiler APIs MCP Server', which suggests a broader scope related to code execution and possibly compilation APIs. This feels thin and under-scoped for the apparent domain.
The tool surface is severely incomplete for a compiler/execution API server. It lacks obvious operations like listing supported languages, getting code execution status or results separately, managing sessions, or handling compilation-specific tasks, which are typical in such domains.
Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.
If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.
Search, document and execute authenticated API calls across 700+ apps via one MCP server
Let AI agents query data and act across all your business apps via MCP.
Remote MCP for 1,500+ APIs. Vault-managed credentials; OAuth or API key. Search, load, and execute.
Discover and call 10,000+ production APIs from one MCP server. Pay-per-call billing for AI agents.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/BACH-AI-Tools/bachai-onecompiler-apis'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server
