Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to fast-html-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      MCP server that enables AI coding agents to read and write to a local-first HTML/CSS design canvas, bridging visual design and code generation.
      1
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      A local MCP server that lets AI agents publish markdown/HTML to a browser viewer with session management, revision diffs, and live updates via a single tool call.
      2
      MIT
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to perform deterministic search synthesis and compile Sparkpage layouts into comparison matrices and ready-to-render HTML interfaces through a zero-dependency Python MCP server. Plugs into Claude Desktop, Cursor, and other MCP clients for structured, low-latency output with execution telemetry.
      7
      -
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables autonomous web agents to prune raw HTML into accessibility-friendly semantic trees with 80%+ token reduction, auto-map form input schemas, convert HTML/Markdown tables into type-inferred JSON records, and score agent execution trajectories. Runs as a zero-dependency, stdlib-only MCP stdio server for Claude Desktop, Cursor, and Windsurf.
      7
      MIT
    • F
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      MCP server that gives AI coding agents the ability to design UIs through Google Stitch. It generates production-ready HTML and screenshots from natural language prompts.
      9
      -

    TDQS

    B3.2/5.0

    Scored across 19 tools

    Disambiguation3/5

    There is some overlap between tools like patch_html and set_attribute (both modify elements via CSS selectors), and write_raw_html vs write_html_file both write HTML but with unclear distinction. However, most tools have clearly defined purposes targeting different aspects (sections, templates, components), so the ambiguity is limited.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tool names follow a consistent lower_snake_case verb_noun pattern (e.g., list_components, render_page, check_consistency). Verbs are clear and nouns align with the object acted upon, making the naming predictable and readable.

    Tool Count3/5

    With 19 tools, the set is on the heavy side (16-25). While each tool has a specific role, the number feels slightly excessive for HTML manipulation, especially given the overlapping edit/write tools that could potentially be consolidated.

    Completeness4/5

    The tool surface covers creation, reading, editing, rendering, and template/component management comprehensively. The main gap is the lack of delete/removal operations (e.g., delete_element or remove_section), but core workflows are well-supported.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessNo issues