fnos-mcp
Related Servers
Alternatives to fnos-mcp
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceEnables self-hosted access to Synology NAS files, system monitoring, container management, and download tasks through MCP clients, with optional connectivity to ChatGPT via a secure tunnel.31MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables AI agents to inspect and operate a UGOS Pro NAS through its built-in HTTPS API via 25 tools covering system stats, storage volumes, files, downloads, photos, and media libraries, without SSH. Read-only tools run directly, write tools prompt for confirmation, destructive deletes require an explicit second confirmation, and it can be deployed either locally over stdio or on the NAS via Docker SSE.2MIT
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceMCP server for managing FeiNiu fnOS NAS via AI chat. Supports system status, Docker container operations, and disk information retrieval.48 npmMIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables Claude or any other MCP client to manage a Synology NAS running DSM 7 — system health, disks and storage, files, Container Manager, packages, accounts and shares, security, Photos, Drive, Synology Office and any other DSM API. It handles 2FA through a stored trusted-device token, pins the NAS's certificate before sending credentials, gates tools behind read/write/admin permission tiers, and previews risky changes like deletions or public sharing.MIT
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceSelf-hosted MCP server that exposes Synology Drive, Spreadsheet, MailPlus, and Calendar as structured tools for AI agents, enabling file, spreadsheet, email, and calendar management via natural language.398 npm11MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables management of a UGREEN NAS running UGOS over SSH and SFTP, exposing 39 tools for system status, Docker containers/images/networks/compose, files and data transfer, backups, and network inspection. Every mutating action runs through a dry-run plan with a single-use confirmation token, so operations are reviewed before anything changes.76 npm1MIT
TDQS
Scored across 219 tools
Many tools map to distinct resources, but overlap is frequent: app_task_cancel vs app_install_cancel/app_update_cancel/app_download_cancel/app_task_action, docker_request vs specific Docker tools, raw_request vs everything, and multiple file_share_* variants. Descriptions are detailed, but an agent still faces unclear boundaries on when to use generic fallbacks versus specific tools.
Nearly all tools use a consistent domain_action snake_case convention (file_list, docker_container_action, user_group_add), making names predictable. Minor deviations exist (login, logout, whoami, status_overview, raw_request) but do not seriously hinder readability.
219 tools is extreme for any server, far beyond the 50+ threshold for a severe mismatch; even a broad NAS OS surface does not justify this many, especially with numerous cancel/action variants and catch-all request tools. This volume will overwhelm an agent's selection process.
Coverage spans file operations, users/groups, apps, Docker, storage, network, monitoring, downloads, Baidu Netdisk, logs, and diagnostics, with a raw_request fallback for uncovered endpoints. Gaps remain around pool/volume creation, RAID/backup/snapshot, and network configuration, but core NAS lifecycle operations are broadly represented.