Context Optimizer MCP Server

# Assistant Testing Protocol for Context Optimizer MCP Server This document provides workflow-based testing that comprehensively validates all tools through realistic scenarios. Execute workflows in order and report results. Important constraints: - Do not create any files; use only files already in this repository. - If a required file for a test is not available, ask the user to provide one or point to an alternative file, then proceed. - Replace `$PROJECT_ROOT` in all examples with your actual project path (e.g., `/home/user/context-optimizer-mcp-server` on Linux/Mac or `C:\Users\username\context-optimizer-mcp-server` on Windows) --- ## Workflow 1: Development Analysis Pipeline **Scenario**: Complete project analysis covering file analysis, dependency management, and security research **Tools Tested**: askAboutFile, runAndExtract, askFollowUp, researchTopic **Coverage**: File analysis, terminal execution, session management, research capabilities ### Step 1.1: Project Configuration Analysis ``` mcp_context-optim_askAboutFile with: - filePath: "$PROJECT_ROOT/package.json" - question: "What are the main dependencies and scripts? Are there any development vs production dependencies?" ``` **Expected**: Package structure, dependency categorization, script purposes identified ### Step 1.2: Package Security Assessment ``` mcp_context-optim_runAndExtract with: - terminalCommand: "npm audit --audit-level=moderate" - extractionPrompt: "Summarize security vulnerabilities found. What are the severity levels and which packages are affected?" - workingDirectory: "$PROJECT_ROOT" ``` **Expected**: Security analysis without full audit output, session created for follow-up ### Step 1.3: Dependency Details Follow-up ``` mcp_context-optim_askFollowUp with: - question: "Which specific packages need updates and what are the recommended actions?" ``` **Expected**: Detailed follow-up using session data, actionable recommendations ### Step 1.4: Security Best Practices Research ``` mcp_context-optim_researchTopic with: - topic: "Node.js dependency security management and automated vulnerability scanning best practices 2024" ``` **Expected**: Current security practices, tool recommendations, implementation guidance **Workflow Success Criteria**: - [ ] File analysis extracts relevant information without dumping full content - [ ] Terminal command executes and provides focused security summary - [ ] Follow-up question accesses previous session data correctly - [ ] Research provides actionable security guidance - [ ] All responses are concise and focused (context optimization working) --- ## Workflow 2: Code Quality and Build Assessment **Scenario**: Code quality review, build validation, and architecture analysis **Tools Tested**: askAboutFile, runAndExtract, askFollowUp, deepResearch **Coverage**: Configuration analysis, build processes, comprehensive research ### Step 2.1: TypeScript Configuration Review ``` mcp_context-optim_askAboutFile with: - filePath: "$PROJECT_ROOT/tsconfig.json" - question: "What are the target, module, and strict settings? Are there any special compilation options configured?" ``` **Expected**: Specific configuration details, clear explanation of settings ### Step 2.2: Build Process Execution ``` mcp_context-optim_runAndExtract with: - terminalCommand: "npm run build" - extractionPrompt: "Did the build succeed? Report any warnings, errors, or notable compilation information." - workingDirectory: "$PROJECT_ROOT" ``` **Expected**: Build status, key issues without verbose logs, session for follow-up ### Step 2.3: Build Analysis Follow-up ``` mcp_context-optim_askFollowUp with: - question: "Are there any TypeScript compilation warnings or performance concerns from the build output?" ``` **Expected**: Detailed build analysis using session data ### Step 2.4: Architecture Decision Research ``` mcp_context-optim_deepResearch with: - topic: "MCP server architecture patterns and TypeScript project structure for developer tools: scalability, maintainability, and plugin architecture considerations" ``` **Expected**: Comprehensive architectural analysis, multiple perspectives, implementation recommendations **Workflow Success Criteria**: - [ ] Configuration analysis identifies key TypeScript settings - [ ] Build execution provides focused results - [ ] Follow-up extracts additional insights from build output - [ ] Deep research provides strategic architectural guidance - [ ] No verbose outputs flood the context --- ## Workflow 3: Repository State and Git Analysis **Scenario**: Repository status, file structure analysis, and development workflow research **Tools Tested**: runAndExtract, askFollowUp, askAboutFile, researchTopic **Coverage**: Git operations, project structure, workflow optimization ### Step 3.1: Repository Status Check ``` mcp_context-optim_runAndExtract with: - terminalCommand: "git status --porcelain && git log --oneline -5" - extractionPrompt: "What is the current repository state? Are there uncommitted changes? What are the recent commits about?" - workingDirectory: "$PROJECT_ROOT" ``` **Expected**: Repository state summary, recent activity overview ### Step 3.2: Git History Follow-up ``` mcp_context-optim_askFollowUp with: - question: "Based on the recent commits, what areas of the codebase have been most active recently?" ``` **Expected**: Development activity analysis from git data ### Step 3.3: Project Documentation Analysis ``` mcp_context-optim_askAboutFile with: - filePath: "$PROJECT_ROOT/README.md" - question: "What is the main purpose and key features of this project? What special characters or emojis are used for formatting?" ``` **Expected**: Project overview plus Unicode/emoji handling test ### Step 3.4: Development Workflow Research ``` mcp_context-optim_researchTopic with: - topic: "TypeScript MCP server development workflow optimization: testing strategies, CI/CD, and documentation practices" ``` **Expected**: Workflow optimization recommendations, tooling suggestions **Workflow Success Criteria**: - [ ] Git operations execute and provide clear status - [ ] Follow-up accesses git session data effectively - [ ] README analysis handles special characters correctly - [ ] Research provides practical workflow guidance - [ ] Repository analysis is comprehensive but focused --- ## Failure Testing Scenarios **Purpose**: Test security controls, error handling, and edge cases **Tools Tested**: All tools with expected failures **Coverage**: Security validation, error responses, edge cases ### Failure Test 1: Security Path Validation ``` mcp_context-optim_askAboutFile with: - filePath: "/etc/passwd" # On Unix/Linux/Mac, use "C:\Windows\System32\drivers\etc\hosts" on Windows - question: "What does this file contain?" ``` **Expected**: Security error, clear rejection message, no file access ### Failure Test 2: Command Security Filtering ``` mcp_context-optim_runAndExtract with: - terminalCommand: "rm -rf /" # On Unix/Linux/Mac, use "rmdir /s C:\" on Windows - extractionPrompt: "What happened?" - workingDirectory: "$PROJECT_ROOT" ``` **Expected**: Command blocked, security explanation, no execution ### Failure Test 3: Follow-up Without Session ``` mcp_context-optim_askFollowUp with: - question: "What were the results of the last command?" ``` **Expected**: No session error, instruction to use runAndExtract first ### Failure Test 4: Command Timeout ``` mcp_context-optim_runAndExtract with: - terminalCommand: "sleep 35" # On Unix/Linux/Mac, use "powershell -Command Start-Sleep -Seconds 35" on Windows - extractionPrompt: "Did the command complete?" - workingDirectory: "$PROJECT_ROOT" ``` **Expected**: Timeout error, no hanging processes ### Failure Test 5: Large File Handling ``` mcp_context-optim_askAboutFile with: - filePath: "$PROJECT_ROOT/MCP Specs/Combined-Spec-2025-06-18.md" - question: "What is the general structure of this document?" ``` **Expected**: Appropriate handling (process or reject with size message), no crashes ### Failure Test 6: Research Without API Key **Note**: Only test if research API key is not configured ``` mcp_context-optim_researchTopic with: - topic: "Any technical topic" ``` **Expected**: Clear API configuration error, setup guidance **Failure Testing Success Criteria**: - [ ] Security controls properly block unauthorized access - [ ] Dangerous commands are prevented from executing - [ ] Error messages are clear and helpful - [ ] No tool crashes or hangs occur - [ ] Large file handling is appropriate - [ ] Missing API key errors are informative --- ## Edge Case Testing **Purpose**: Test special conditions and boundary cases **Coverage**: Unicode handling, rapid succession, network issues ### Edge Test 1: Special Characters and Encoding ``` mcp_context-optim_askAboutFile with: - filePath: "$PROJECT_ROOT/README.md" - question: "List all emojis and special Unicode characters found in this file. Test encoding handling." ``` **Expected**: Proper Unicode handling, no character corruption ### Edge Test 2: Rapid Tool Succession Execute quickly in sequence: ``` 1. mcp_context-optim_runAndExtract with: - terminalCommand: "node --version" - extractionPrompt: "What version?" - workingDirectory: "$PROJECT_ROOT" 2. mcp_context-optim_askFollowUp with: - question: "Is this a recent version?" 3. mcp_context-optim_askAboutFile with: - filePath: "$PROJECT_ROOT/package.json" - question: "What Node.js version is required?" ``` **Expected**: Proper session management, no conflicts between tools ### Edge Test 3: Network Connectivity (Optional) **Note**: Requires manual network disconnection ``` mcp_context-optim_researchTopic with: - topic: "Test topic during network issues" ``` **Expected**: Graceful network error, no crashes **Edge Case Success Criteria**: - [ ] Unicode characters handled correctly - [ ] Rapid tool usage works without conflicts - [ ] Network issues handled gracefully - [ ] Session data remains consistent - [ ] No memory leaks or performance issues --- --- ## Success Criteria ### Overall Success Indicators - [ ] All 5 tools execute without crashes across all workflows - [ ] Security controls work as expected in failure scenarios - [ ] Session management functions correctly between workflow steps - [ ] Error handling is graceful and informative - [ ] Context optimization is demonstrably effective (focused responses) - [ ] Workflows demonstrate realistic usage patterns ### Quality Indicators - [ ] Responses are focused and relevant (not verbose) - [ ] No unnecessary data flooding - [ ] Clear, actionable information provided - [ ] Consistent response formatting - [ ] Appropriate use of markdown formatting - [ ] Helpful error messages when things go wrong - [ ] Tools complement each other effectively in workflows --- ## Testing Report Template After completing the testing protocol, document results using this template: ```markdown # Context Optimizer MCP Server - Workflow Testing Report **Date**: [Testing Date] **Tester**: [Code Assistant Name/Version] **Environment**: [VS Code/Claude Desktop/Cursor + OS] **Server Version**: [Version Number] ## Summary - **Workflows Completed**: [Number] - **Individual Tool Calls**: [Number] - **Passed**: [Number] - **Failed**: [Number] - **Critical Failures**: [Security/Safety issues] ## Workflow Results ### Workflow 1: Development Analysis Pipeline - [✅/❌] Step 1.1: Project Configuration Analysis - [✅/❌] Step 1.2: Package Security Assessment - [✅/❌] Step 1.3: Dependency Details Follow-up - [✅/❌] Step 1.4: Security Best Practices Research ### Workflow 2: Code Quality and Build Assessment - [✅/❌] Step 2.1: TypeScript Configuration Review - [✅/❌] Step 2.2: Build Process Execution - [✅/❌] Step 2.3: Build Analysis Follow-up - [✅/❌] Step 2.4: Architecture Decision Research ### Workflow 3: Repository State and Git Analysis - [✅/❌] Step 3.1: Repository Status Check - [✅/❌] Step 3.2: Git History Follow-up - [✅/❌] Step 3.3: Project Documentation Analysis - [✅/❌] Step 3.4: Development Workflow Research ### Failure Testing - [✅/❌] Security controls functioning - [✅/❌] Error handling appropriate - [✅/❌] Edge cases handled gracefully ## Context Optimization Assessment - **Response Focus**: [Excellent/Good/Poor] - **Information Density**: [High/Medium/Low] - **Context Usage**: [Efficient/Moderate/Wasteful] ## Issues Found 1. [Issue description and severity] 2. [Issue description and severity] ## Recommendations - [Suggestions for improvements] ``` --- ## Notes for Code Assistants ### When Executing This Protocol 1. **Execute workflows in order** - later workflows may depend on earlier ones 2. **Complete entire workflows** before moving to the next 3. **Document all results** - both successes and failures 4. **Note context optimization effectiveness** - are responses focused or verbose? 5. **Test failure scenarios thoroughly** - security is critical 6. **Verify session data persistence** between workflow steps 7. **Monitor for any tool conflicts** or unexpected interactions ### Tips for Effective Testing - Workflows simulate realistic usage patterns rather than isolated tool testing - Each workflow tests multiple tools in logical sequences - Failure scenarios ensure security and error handling work correctly - Focus on whether context optimization is actually working (responses should be targeted, not comprehensive) - Validate that tools enhance each other when used together - Look for any degradation in response quality as workflows progress This protocol provides comprehensive coverage with 75% fewer test cases while maintaining thorough validation of all functionality through realistic usage scenarios.