domoai-mcp
Related Servers
Alternatives to domoai-mcp
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables smart home automation via MCP with human-in-the-loop approval gates, providing device discovery, state queries, policy checks, and proposal-based execution of actions and scenes that only proceed after explicit user confirmation, with full audit logging.MIT
- AlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceEnables control of ECHONETLite home automation devices like air conditioners and sensors via MCP, supporting HVAC management and real-time monitoring.141MIT
- FlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceEnables control and management of smart home devices across multiple rooms through specialized MCP servers. Supports lights, thermostats, fans, and ovens with room-specific rules and automatic persistence.5-
- AlicenseBqualityBmaintenanceEnables control of Matter smart-home devices via REST and MCP APIs, supporting lights, sensors, and AC units with federation capabilities.23MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceA powerful MCP server that enables AI assistants to discover, commission, and control Matter-compatible smart home devices through a standardized interface.8 npm8MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables AI agents to control Home Assistant smart home devices via MCP, with zero external dependencies. Supports calling services, getting states, and looking up service parameters.43 npmMIT
TDQS
Scored across 20 tools
Most tools target distinct lifecycle stages, but execute_plan, schedule_plan, and commit_or_schedule_bundle have overlapping boundaries since 'bundle' is never clearly separated from 'plan.' The validate_* and schedule/cancel pairs are otherwise reasonably distinguishable with the help of their descriptions.
The set consistently uses snake_case verb_noun names such as get_state, validate_plan, list_scheduled_plans, and cancel_recurring_schedule. The main deviation is commit_or_schedule_bundle, which combines two actions in one name, but overall the pattern is predictable.
At 20 tools, the server sits in the heavier range, and the plan/bundle/schedule/recurring variations add conceptual surface area even if the domain is broad. Most tools earn their place for a full energy-management workflow, but the count is borderline and would benefit from consolidation.
The surface covers the core lifecycle well: validation, approval, execution, one-time scheduling, recurring schedules, cancellation, audit, and optimization scenarios. Minor gaps exist, such as no direct way to retrieve a single plan/approval or inspect raw capabilities, but agents can work around these.