Skip to main content
Glama
Darko893

Haunt API

by Darko893
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

Related Servers

Alternatives to Haunt API

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • agent-web-scraper-mcp

      aparajithn
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Web scraping MCP server for Al agents. 6 tools: extract clean text/markdown from any URL, structured scraping with CSS selectors, full-page screenshots via Playwright, link extraction with regex filtering, metadata extraction (OG tags, Twitter cards), and Google search. Free tier: 50 requests/IP/day.
      8
      MIT
    • webpeel by webpeel

      webpeelofficial

      webpeel
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      The web data platform for AI agents. Fetch, search, crawl, extract, monitor, and screenshot any URL. 55+ domain extractors, 65-98% token savings. 7 MCP tools included.
      332 npm
      12
      AGPL 3.0

    • extrapify

      christ0pper
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Structured web context infrastructure for AI agents. Extract reliable schema-guided JSON from websites using Claude-powered parsing, Browserless fallback rendering, and MCP-native workflows.
      1
      1
      MIT

    • krwl3r

      garciarsdiego
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      MCP server for web scraping and browser automation, enabling AI agents to extract clean, token-efficient content from web pages.
      1
      MIT
    Deploy Server
    One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

    TDQS

    A4.3/5.0

    Scored across 3 tools

    Disambiguation3/5

    The tools have overlapping purposes, as all three extract data from URLs, with extract_url described as a general-purpose tool that can handle what the other two do. However, the descriptions clearly differentiate their optimised use cases: extract_article for editorial content, extract_metadata for meta tags, and extract_url for custom extractions, which helps reduce confusion but still leaves some ambiguity.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with 'extract_' as the prefix, using snake_case uniformly. This predictability makes it easy for agents to understand the naming convention and relate the tools to their shared purpose of extraction.

    Tool Count4/5

    With 3 tools, the count is reasonable for a focused extraction server, but it feels slightly thin as it only covers read-only extraction operations without broader management or configuration tools. The tools are well-scoped within their domain, but the set could benefit from additional complementary functions.

    Completeness3/5

    The server covers core extraction tasks for URLs, articles, and metadata, but there are notable gaps such as no update, delete, or management operations (e.g., for API keys or usage tracking). As a read-only extraction service, it lacks lifecycle coverage, which limits agent workflows to just data retrieval without any control or monitoring capabilities.

    Maintenance

    ActivityActive
    ResponsivenessSyncing

    Resources