grok-bot-mcp
Related Servers
Alternatives to grok-bot-mcp
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceEnables any MCP client such as Cursor, Claude Code, or Codex to dispatch tasks to a Cursor Grok Bot running on its cloud computer, poll for its replies, and interrupt an in-progress run. It also lists the bots available for contact, without routing replies through an extra model.41MIT
- AlicenseCqualityCmaintenanceEnables IDEs and MCP hosts to drive a user's Grok Bot cloud agents, including sending messages, waiting for replies, reading history, and managing agents, secrets, widgets, handoffs, and desktop access. It acts as an outbound bridge from Cursor, Claude, and VS Code to those cloud agents.21MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceAn MCP server that lets agents delegate work to Grok Bot desktop app bots by sending messages, waiting for and reading replies, checking weekly usage, and creating, renaming, or deleting Bots. It drives the locally running app over its debug port, so any MCP client can hand tasks to an always-on bot.2MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables MCP clients to invoke Grok Bot through a webhook and receive synchronous tool results from its asynchronous callbacks, with run management, cancellation, and budget guardrails.403 npmMIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceEnables MCP clients like Codex and Claude Code to start or continue conversations with Grok Build, track progress, read completed answers, and cancel running turns using an existing Grok login.1Apache 2.0
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceLets MCP clients such as Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, and VS Code drive the Grok Bot desktop app on macOS by listing the user's bots, reading their chats, sending them messages, and answering their multiple-choice questions locally without API keys. All actions run live in the real app via the macOS Accessibility API, with no network calls, telemetry, or dependencies.4MIT
TDQS
Scored across 11 tools
Most tools target clear distinct operations (account vs bot lifecycle vs transcript vs database). However, get_transcript, read_transcript_entries, and search_messages all operate over transcript data, and list_bots vs search_bots overlap, which could cause occasional misselection.
All 11 tools follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern (check_usage, switch_account, list_bots, create_bot, delete_bot, send_message, get_transcript, search_bots, list_databases, read_transcript_entries, search_messages). No mixed conventions.
11 tools is well within the ideal 3-15 range and each covers a meaningful slice of the domain (accounts, bots, transcripts, databases). Nothing feels redundant or padded.
Core lifecycle is covered: list/search/create/delete bots, send/get messages, and query databases. Minor gaps exist, e.g. no update_bot and no tool to add/list accounts beyond check_usage/switch_account, but agents can work around these.