
Dsa Coach Mcp
io.github.aaryagodbole由 GitHub 账号 aaryagodbole 发布v0.2.0更新于 Nov 3, 2026
面向LeetCode、Codeforces等的DSA教练:间隔重复复习与错题日志。
AI 翻译由 AI 模型根据下方的原文描述翻译,可能有误。
原文描述
DSA coach for LeetCode, Codeforces and more: spaced-repetition revision and a mistake journal.
概览
Dsa Coach 的本地 MCP 服务;无需登录;STDIO。
暂无 AI 概览:以下信息来自注册中心条目和服务本身。
安装
在 SourceWeft 中
- 打开 控制台中的 Dsa Coach Mcp,将其添加到工作区。
- 为需要使用其工具的对话启用该服务。
Desktop only,通过 STDIO。 STDIO 服务会启动本地进程,因此需要 SourceWeft 桌面宿主。
其他 MCP 客户端
参照 仓库 中的启动说明。
README
dsa-coach-mcp
[CI] [PyPI] [Python 3.12+] [License: MIT]
An MCP server that turns your LeetCode and Codeforces history into a DSA coach inside Claude, Cursor or any MCP client: see where you stand across platforms, get problems to try next, and revise what you solved on a spaced-repetition schedule, with a mistake journal that remembers why you got things wrong and builds your next practice set around it.
[dsa-coach-mcp driven over stdio on live LeetCode and Codeforces data]
A real session, recorded by examples/demo.py: it starts the server over stdio and calls its tools on live data.
Why
Practice data is split across sites, and each grades difficulty its own way (LeetCode's Easy/Medium/Hard, Codeforces' 800-3500 ratings). Most trackers count problems; few tell you what you are forgetting. This server puts both platforms behind one interface and schedules revision with FSRS, so the model you already talk to can coach you.
FSRS predicts the chance you still remember each problem and brings it back just before
that chance drops below 90%. In the open
spaced-repetition benchmark
over ~10k Anki collections, FSRS predicted recall better than SM-2 for the large
majority of users. Once you have a review history, personalize_schedule fits its
parameters to how fast you forget.
Counting solved problems hides the real signal: the same few mistakes, repeated. Every review can carry the mistakes behind it, and the model turns those patterns into practice sets and revision quizzes aimed at exactly what you keep missing.
Design
The server returns data, not decisions. It never hardcodes what counts as a weak topic or the next level up; the model reads your profile and the platform's own vocabulary and decides.
- Adapters translate one platform's API into shared models (
Problem,Profile,PlatformInfo). Nothing outside an adapter names a platform. - Data comes from the platforms. Tags and levels are read from each platform's
API, and a review takes the problem's title, link and tags from the platform rather
than from the model, so nothing in your history is invented. Platforms' own tag
lists are incomplete, so
search_problemsaccepts a tag outside them and only reports it when nothing matched. - Profiles say what they can't see. Each profile carries
limitations, e.g. LeetCode only exposes your 20 most recent accepted submissions publicly.
Tools
Prompts
Dashboard
show_dashboard is an MCP App:
hosts that support them (Claude, Claude Desktop, VS Code Copilot, Goose and others) render
it inside the conversation; every other host gets the same data as the tool's result.
The view is one self-contained HTML file with no external scripts, follows the host's
light or dark theme, and talks to the host over the MCP Apps postMessage protocol.
[dsa-coach dashboard, dark theme] [dsa-coach dashboard, light theme]
Rendered from sample data by examples/dashboard_host.py, which plays the host's side of the protocol.
Any platform
LeetCode and Codeforces have adapters that read from their APIs. Every other platform
works through the page you are looking at: pair this server with a browser MCP server
such as Playwright MCP in extension mode,
which lets the model read the tab open in your own browser, logged in. The model reads
the problem page and calls record_problem with its URL, title, tags and difficulty;
from then on it is reviewed, scheduled and journaled like any other problem.
No platform is listed in the code: the platform is the problem URL's host, and its
problem id is the URL's path. Problems recorded this way are marked
"source": "reported", because they come from a page the model read rather than from
the platform's API, and a host that has an adapter is always sent to its adapter.
Mistake journal
There is no fixed list of mistake types. The model labels each mistake in a few words and is shown every label used before, so it reuses yours instead of inventing new ones; your journal's vocabulary grows from your own reviews. The server only stores and counts them; spotting the pattern is the model's job.
Install
Requires uv.
Claude Desktop: add to claude_desktop_config.json:
Claude Code:
Cursor: same command and args as above in .cursor/mcp.json.
Agent skill
skills/dsa-coach/SKILL.md tells the agent when to reach
for these tools and how to use them well: how to rate a review, to reuse existing
mistake labels, and to record problems from other platforms only from a page it read.
For Claude Code, copy it into your skills:
Configuration
To personalise the schedule, install the optimizer extra (it pulls in PyTorch):
uvx --from 'dsa-coach-mcp[optimizer]' dsa-coach-mcp.
Privacy
No login and no API keys. The server only calls the platforms' public APIs with the handles you give it, and revision cards stay in a local SQLite file.
Adding a platform
- Write
src/dsa_coach_mcp/platforms/<name>.pywith a class implementingPlatformAdapter:name,describe(),profile()andsearch(). - Add the class to
ADAPTERSinplatforms/__init__.py. - Add tests with a mocked API, like
tests/test_codeforces.py.
The server and tools need no changes.
Evals
Unit tests check the code; evals/ checks whether a model can actually
coach with these tools. A model drives the real server over the MCP protocol, against a
fixture world (one practice platform, a seeded history, a fixed clock), on tasks such
as planning from a profile, logging a review with its mistakes, reusing an existing
mistake label, recording a problem from another platform, and staying silent when no
tool is needed.
Grading is deterministic, with no LLM judge: each task lists the tool calls it expects with predicates on their arguments, the tools it must not touch, and a call budget. A run reports pass rate, tool-selection accuracy, argument accuracy, tool error rate, calls per task and token usage.
The model is configuration, not code. Any API that speaks the chat completions format works, whether a hosted free tier, a paid API or a model served on your own machine:
The loop talks to models through a small AgentBackend interface
(evals/backends/base.py); an API with a different wire
format is one more backend module. Runs never start on their own: run it locally, or
start the Agent evals workflow from the Actions tab after setting the
EVALS_BASE_URL and EVALS_MODEL repository variables (and an EVALS_API_KEY secret
if your API needs one). The graders, the fixture, the loop and the backend are
unit-tested in CI without calling any model.
Development
Re-record the demo at the top of this page against live data:
Tests never hit the network: adapters are tested against mocked API responses. See CONTRIBUTING.md.
License
来源:README.md,提交 8a4bf99
工具
0版本历史
1- v0.2.0最新Nov 3, 2026
评分
已满足适用检查项的 50%
该评分衡量此收录条目的完整程度,依据注册中心条目、端点与公开来源计算得出。它不是对服务器本身的评价,也不表示服务器安全或当前可用:可连通性是带日期的检查结果,评分也不包含安装量或用户评价。
- 近 30 天内可连通25 分
请保持端点能够响应 MCP 握手;SourceWeft 每 30 天探测一次。
- 已声明认证方式10 分
请在注册中心条目中声明凭据请求头,或保持端点能够响应探测,以便判定其认证方式。
- 已列出工具15 分
请让服务器在无凭据时响应 tools/list,或发布可在沙箱中无凭据启动的软件包。
- 描述必需15 分
- 图标10 分
- 文档15 分
- 许可证10 分