Skip to main content
Glama
Scofield81

Ubuntu Control MCP

by Scofield81

Related Servers

Alternatives to Ubuntu Control MCP

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables full Linux desktop control including windows, mouse, keyboard, clipboard, audio, screenshots, OCR, accessibility, and system management through MCP-compatible AI agents.
      1
      MIT
    • A
      license
      B
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Provides AI assistants with the ability to control Linux desktop environments through tools for file management, application launching, and system operations like clipboard access. It includes a multi-level security model to manage permissions for safe, elevated, and restricted actions.
      6
      MIT
    • A
      license
      B
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables full local computer control from MCP clients, including terminal commands, file system operations, application management, screen capture, and input device automation across Windows, macOS, and Linux.
      27
      MIT
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      Not graded
      maintenance
      On-server agent for managing PostgreSQL, Redis, Keycloak, and NGINX on Ubuntu infrastructure with real-time monitoring, automated maintenance, and distributed command execution.
      -
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables controlling your own Linux desktop machines from any MCP-capable LLM client, with opt-in agent capabilities for shell, filesystem, processes, screenshots, system info, and input injection.
      1
      MIT

    TDQS

    B3.1/5.0

    Scored across 55 tools

    Disambiguation3/5

    Most tools are grouped into recognizable clusters (system, apt, terminal, desktop, files, hosts), but a few boundaries blur: shell_run can also target remote hosts and thus overlaps with host_run, while system_status summarizes metrics that are also covered by cpu_usage, memory_usage, disk_usage, and process_list. The detailed descriptions help, but with 55 tools an agent can still hesitate between several overlapping entry points.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    Names are consistently lower_snake_case and mostly follow resource-action patterns such as terminal_open, apt_update, mouse_click, and host_add. The main deviations are noun-only names like logs, screenshot, system_info, and file_info, plus file tools using verb-noun ordering (list_files, read_file) while many control tools use noun-verb ordering. Overall the style is predictable enough.

    Tool Count2/5

    55 tools is far above the typical coherent scope and bundles system monitoring, package management, terminal emulation, GUI automation, file operations, and remote host management into a single server. Each cluster is internally useful, but the aggregate surface is heavy and creates a large selection burden for agents. A more cohesive design would split this into focused servers by domain.

    Completeness3/5

    The set covers monitoring, package installation, file management, terminal sessions, GUI interaction, and remote host operations well, but there are obvious control gaps: process_list has no corresponding process_kill or signal tool, and service_status has no service_start/stop/restart tool. These can be worked around via shell_run or host_run, but they are notable missing lifecycle operations for a server described as an Ubuntu control interface.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues