hiberden-mcp
Related Servers
Alternatives to hiberden-mcp
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceEnables local-first search and analysis of Boxes home inventory exports and images, with tools for inventory queries, documentation audits, and signed webhook verification.7Apache 2.0
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceEnables AI clients to query a local SQLite archive of saved web page snapshots read-only, listing sites, searching pages, and retrieving accumulated content or specific snapshot versions. It runs locally over stdio against an existing archive database.MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceProvides read-only search and context-pack creation over a local source library, letting AI assistants retrieve relevant excerpts and audit cited quotations.20MIT
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceLocal-first, read-only Codex session aggregator that indexes multiple CODEX_HOME directories into a SQLite database and provides MCP tools for cross-project, archival, and sub-agent history queries.53MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables read-only access to Kilo Code and Opencode conversation history stored in a local SQLite database, allowing users to list projects and sessions, read messages, and perform full-text keyword searches across all messages.-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables agents to inspect a local Bot archive by listing bots, retrieving transcripts, and searching message text with surrounding context over stdio, without network access or API keys.2MIT
TDQS
Scored across 14 tools
Each tool targets a distinct resource and granularity: list_* for enumeration, *_detail for single-resource lookup, find_file/list_archive_files for file-level search versus manifest, and the two roll-ups (coverage_status vs catalog_stats) explicitly cross-reference each other. There is no realistic query where an agent would be torn between two tools.
The dominant patterns are clear: list_<plural> for enumeration and <noun>_detail for single-item views. The remaining names (coverage_status, catalog_stats, recent_activity, find_file, verify_copy) are descriptive and snake_case, but mix noun-noun and verb-noun forms, so the convention is mostly consistent rather than fully uniform.
14 tools map cleanly onto the archive library's resource types—projects, collections, archives, files, destinations, tapes, jobs—plus cross-cutting views for coverage, activity, stats, and verification. Each tool has a clear purpose and none feels redundant or like filler.
The read/verify surface is strong: every major resource has a listing, most have detail views, file-level search and manifests exist, and job/tape/coverage states are covered. The notable gap is lifecycle management—no restore, policy editing, destination creation, or backup triggers—so agents can inspect and verify but cannot act beyond verification.