Skip to main content
Glama
deenesjakoruzh
weezerzero

shellserver

by weezerzero
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
Python
Local

shellserver

A small Model Context Protocol (MCP) server built with the Python MCP SDK (FastMCP). It exposes one tool that runs shell commands on the machine where the server process runs.

Requirements

  • Python 3.14+ (see pyproject.toml)

  • uv for installing and running dependencies

Related MCP server: Shell MCP Server

Setup

Clone or copy this repository, then from the project root:

uv sync

Running the server

The server uses stdio transport (the default for FastMCP).

uv run python server.py

Do not pipe extra data to stdout from the server process; MCP uses stdout for JSON-RPC. Logging in server.py is directed to stderr.

Tool: terminal_tool

Parameter

Type

Required

Default

Description

command

string

yes

—

Shell command to run

cwd

string

no

—

Working directory for the subprocess

timeout_seconds

number

no

120

Seconds to wait before killing the process

The tool returns a single text block containing exit_code, stdout, and stderr. If the command exceeds the timeout, the process is terminated and the response indicates a timeout.

Connecting a client (example of running locally)

Point your MCP host at uv with this project as the working directory. Example configuration shape:

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "shellserver": {
      "command": "uv",
      "args": ["run", "python", "server.py"],
      "cwd": "/absolute/path/to/shellserver"
    }
  }
}

Adjust the key name and cwd to match your editor or client.

Security

This server executes arbitrary shell commands on the host. Anyone who can invoke MCP tools against this server effectively has shell access to that machine. Use only on trusted hosts, with trusted clients, and with clear understanding of the risk.

Available Tools

2 tools
benign_toolBenign ToolC

Download and return a fixed text file via curl.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
timeout_secondsNo

Output Schema

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescription
resultYes

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the use of curl for downloading but does not mention side effects, safety implications, or return behavior. The word 'benign' implies safety but is not explicit.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is a single sentence, which is concise, but it lacks structure (e.g., separate sections for behavior, parameters). It is efficient but under-specified.

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?

Given the tool has one parameter and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain the parameter, return value (despite an output schema existing), or usage context. A more complete description would include parameter details and behavioral notes.

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

Parameters1/5

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

The schema has one parameter ('timeout_seconds') with 0% coverage (no description in the schema). The description does not mention this parameter at all, failing to explain its purpose or default behavior.

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 the action ('Download and return a fixed text file via curl'), with a specific verb, resource, and method. It distinguishes from the sibling 'terminal_tool' which is likely for arbitrary commands.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No mention of context or prerequisites.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

terminal_toolTerminal ToolB

Run a shell command on the host and return stdout, stderr, and exit code.

The command is executed with the system shell. Use only in trusted environments.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
commandYes
cwdNo
timeout_secondsNo

Output Schema

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescription
resultYes

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions execution via system shell and the trust requirement, implying potential dangers, but does not specify whether the tool can modify files or require special permissions.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words, but could be better structured (e.g., separate usage notes). Front-loads the core action.

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?

Given the tool's potential for arbitrary command execution, the description is too brief. Lacks details on command escaping, side effects, or output structure beyond basic terms. The presence of an output schema does not fully compensate for missing safety and behavior details.

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 has 0% parameter description coverage. The description names only 'command' implicitly; 'cwd' and 'timeout_seconds' are not explained. Despite self-explanatory names, an agent lacks details on expected formats and defaults.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states that tool runs a shell command and returns stdout, stderr, and exit code. However, it does not distinguish from sibling 'benign_tool', which could indicate a different 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?

Provides a safety guideline 'Use only in trusted environments', but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use compared to alternatives. Lacks context on prerequisites.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. 2 tool updatesv0.1.0
    • First observedbenign_tool
    • First observedterminal_tool
Install Server
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: one downloads a fixed text file, the other executes shell commands. There is no ambiguity between them.

Naming Consistency5/5

Both tool names follow a consistent adjective_noun pattern in snake_case (benign_tool, terminal_tool), making them predictable and clear.

Tool Count3/5

With only 2 tools, the server feels thin for a shell execution server. While it covers the basic need, it is below the typical well-scoped range of 3-15 tools.

Completeness4/5

The core functionality of running shell commands is covered by terminal_tool. The presence of benign_tool as a fixed downloader is a minor addition; agents can work around the lack of other shell utilities like file listing.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.

Looking for Admin?

If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

  • mcp-shell-server

    tumf
    A
    license
    A
    quality
    A
    maintenance
    A secure shell command execution server implementing the Model Context Protocol (MCP). This server allows remote execution of whitelisted shell commands with support for stdin input.
    1
    191
    MIT

  • Shell MCP Server

    odysseus0
    A
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    A Model Context Protocol server that allows LLMs to execute shell commands and receive their output in a controlled manner.
    7
    MIT

  • Simple Subprocess MCP Server

    yonaka15
    F
    license
    B
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    A Model Context Protocol server that enables LLM applications to safely execute shell commands with error handling and timeout settings.
    1
    -

  • SSH MCP Server

    tufantunc
    A
    license
    A
    quality
    A
    maintenance
    A Model Context Protocol server that allows LLMs to securely execute shell commands on remote Linux and Windows systems via SSH. It supports password and key-based authentication, command timeouts, and sudo elevation for administrative tasks.
    11
    14,123
    688
    MIT

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/weezerzero/mcp-shellserver'

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