Skip to main content
Glama
SagaPeak
by SagaPeak

Related Servers

Alternatives to Artifacta MCP Server

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      A local, agent-to-agent artifact exchange for LLM workflows. Enables MCP-capable tools like Claude, Codex, and Gemini to publish, list, read, update, and continue from artifacts without copying content through chat.
      167 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Self-hosted MCP server for publishing, sharing, and reviewing AI agent artifacts with version history and pinned comments.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      This MCP server enables AI agents to manage artifacts across sessions by providing tools for searching, retrieving, and registering entries in a persistent ledger, ensuring consistency and traceability of agent outputs.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      MCP server providing managed persistent memory for AI agents. Read and write structured state across sessions, tools, and restarts at 1000+ requests per second, with no infrastructure to self-host or operate.
      2
      Apache 2.0
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      A local MCP-controlled artifact shelf for agents to publish generated content with stable preview URLs. Provides a shared SQLite registry and HTTP gallery for human browsing.
      3
      6 npm
      1
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Server-enforced workflow discipline for AI agents. An MCP server providing persistent work items, dependency graphs, quality gates, and actor attribution. Schemas define what agents must produce — the server blocks the call if they don't. Works with any MCP-compatible client.
      206
      MIT

    TDQS

    A4.2/5.0

    Scored across 8 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool has a distinct purpose: upload (store_artifact vs request_upload_url/complete_upload), download (get_artifact_download_url vs get_artifact for metadata), listing (list_artifacts vs list_sessions), and identity (whoami). No overlaps.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., complete_upload, get_artifact, list_artifacts, store_artifact). Even 'whoami' fits as a verb phrase.

    Tool Count5/5

    With 8 tools, the set is well-scoped for an artifact management server. Each tool covers a necessary operation without bloat.

    Completeness4/5

    Core lifecycle operations (upload, download, list, retrieve metadata) are covered, but missing update and delete tools, which is a minor gap.

    Maintenance

    ActivitySlowing
    ResponsivenessNo issues