Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to luda

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      A desktop automation MCP server that enables AI agents to interact with Linux environments through screenshots, window inspection, and input simulation. It provides tools for mouse control, keyboard input, and screen capture using xdotool and XDG Desktop Portals.
      MIT
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      An MCP server that gives a model eyes and hands on a Linux Wayland desktop, enabling screenshot capture, mouse/keyboard control, OCR, and icon detection via OmniParser.
      1
      -
    • F
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Cross-platform desktop automation MCP server that lets AI agents capture screenshots, run OCR with UI-element classification, control mouse/keyboard, and launch programs on Linux, macOS, and Windows.
      20
      1
      -
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      MCP server for controlling Linux desktops over Wayland, enabling AI agents to perform mouse, keyboard, window, and screenshot operations on Fedora KDE Plasma.
      AGPL 3.0
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      An MCP server for reliable native macOS desktop control from AI agents, providing 72 tools for screenshots, mouse, keyboard, scroll, clipboard, window management, and more.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to automate a Linux desktop natively on Wayland, with 68 tools for screen capture, input simulation, browser automation, OCR, accessibility, media, audio, clipboard, notifications, filesystem, system, memory, and network operations through the MCP protocol.
      MIT

    TDQS

    A3.7/5.0

    Scored across 36 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Most tools target clearly distinct operations, and the detailed descriptions resolve boundary cases such as desktop_select vs desktop_choose or desktop_inspect vs desktop_read_text. A few diagnostic/status tools (desktop_status, desktop_report, desktop_doctor) and singular/plural window tools could still be confused at first glance, but not to the point of causing frequent misselection.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    All tool names share the desktop_ prefix and use lowercase snake_case, which provides a strong overall pattern. Most names are verb-led (desktop_click, desktop_set_value, desktop_open_browser), though a few noun-only names like desktop_windows, desktop_applications, and desktop_status are minor deviations from a strict verb_noun convention.

    Tool Count2/5

    36 tools is well above the 25-tool threshold and feels heavy even for a desktop automation server. Each tool is individually meaningful, but the set could be consolidated or grouped more tightly without losing essential functionality.

    Completeness5/5

    The tool surface covers the full desktop automation lifecycle: discovery, observation, inspection, input, window management, verification, and diagnostics/recovery. There are no obvious dead ends; every interaction has a corresponding observation or inspection tool, and failure/health handling is well supported.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues