docs: link ecal-mcp (MCP server exposing eCAL to LLM clients)#2615
Conversation
|
Hi 😄 We often have to do troubleshooting, and an MCP server would certainly help with that, although i suspect we would need to buid in a bit more functionality in order to use it productively. But I think it would be a great starting point. Also there are a few things that I would tweak also: |
Hi @KerstinKeller ! I've only tested this with Cursor so far, and I'm new to eCAL so I don't have a ton of networks to test with. If there's a good kitchen sink example that's quite complicated please share! There's some "eCAL puzzles" I asked agents to solve using the MCP server, I optimized from avg 5-6 tool calls down to 2-3 using many rounds where LLMs used the tools and gave retrospective how they could be better. Will look into using the shared libraries! |
|
Really interesting new extension! For marketing reasons I will then rename rustecal to rustecalAI. 😉 |
ecal-mcpis a local MCP server that exposes eCAL to LLM clients (Cursor, Claude Desktop, etc.). It's a single native Rust binary built onrustecaland the officialrmcpSDK — it joins the eCAL network on the host like any other participant. No daemons, no sidecars.It exposes the eCAL monitoring/pub-sub/service surface as MCP tools so an LLM agent can:
ecal_diagnose_topic— combines a monitoring snapshot with a live measurement window and emits structuredfindings: missing publisher/subscriber, type-signature mismatch, no shared transport, cross-host SHM-domain split, ongoing drops, unhealthy producer process)ecal_topic_stats)server_entity_id)Prebuilt Linux x86_64 / aarch64 + Windows x86_64 binaries are released on GitHub with
.sha256files and one-line install scripts.Test coverage spans two Docker-based e2e testing "tiers": 30 single-host SHM cases, plus 15 cross-container cases on a 4-host topology in network mode + TCP (cross-host transport negotiation, real protobuf
FileDescriptorSetround-tripping, multi-publisher / multi-subscriber listing, mixed-role host attribution).Ask
I'd love feedback from the eCAL maintainers — both on the link itself and (more importantly) on the tool. If anyone is willing to point it at a real deployment and tell me what's missing or wrong, I'd really appreciate it. Issues / discussion welcome at https://github.com/zpg6/ecal-mcp.
... until then I'll leave this here as a draft :)