A
licenseA
qualityC
maintenanceEnables an MCP-capable assistant to read-only access XWiki spaces, pages, and attachments through the XWiki REST API.
6
78 npm
Apache 2.0
lcm2m-caddis-mcp
by LCM2M
Related Servers
Alternatives to lcm2m-caddis-mcp
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseBqualityCmaintenanceEnables read-only access to Questrade accounts, portfolios, market data, transactions, technical analysis, and order history through MCP.11MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables read-only access to GitLab projects, files, directories, and merge requests through MCP tools.-
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables read-only SQL querying and schema inspection across MSSQL, PostgreSQL, and MySQL databases via MCP tools.-
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables read-only interaction with Proxmox Datacenter Manager, allowing users to list and inspect remotes, VMs, containers, nodes, and storages through MCP tools.6-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables MCP clients to safely query one or more PostgreSQL databases with read-only tools and explicitly approved write operations.73 npm1MIT
TDQS
A3.6/5.0
Scored across 31 tools
Disambiguation5/5
All tools have clearly distinct purposes: get vs list for single vs multiple entities, and specialized tools like caddis_get_tree for hierarchy, caddis_batch for batching. Descriptions explicitly guide when to use each one, minimizing confusion.
Naming Consistency5/5
All tools follow the consistent pattern 'caddis_<verb>_<noun>' with snake_case. Verbs are uniformly 'get' for single entities and 'list' for multiple, with only minor outliers like 'caddis_get_tree' and 'caddis_batch' that still fit the pattern.
Tool Count3/5
31 tools is on the high side, exceeding the typical recommended range of 3-15. However, the domain of manufacturing monitoring is rich and warrants many specialized queries. The count is justified but still feels heavy; it's borderline between 2 and 3.
Completeness3/5
The server covers a wide range of read-only operations for equipment, org units, alarms, tags, runs, etc. However, it lacks any write operations (create, update, delete), which is a notable gap if full lifecycle management is expected. For a read-only monitoring API, it is reasonably complete.
Maintenance
ActivityStale
ResponsivenessNo issues