@mcpx-digital/site-health
Related Servers
Alternatives to @mcpx-digital/site-health
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceEnables MCP clients to crawl and audit websites for SEO and technical health, checking on-page elements, links, robots.txt, sitemaps, and duplicate metadata, then returning scores and prioritized fixes.414 npmMIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables AI clients to crawl websites and run technical SEO audits, including broken-link detection, internal-link suggestions with anchors, template-based speed measurement, crawl diffs, and report export through MCP tools and prompts.2MIT

io.github.spalofficial
AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables AI agents and CI systems to run deterministic website QA audits over MCP, with every finding backed by evidence and every result hashed and signed. It checks HTTP, TLS, security headers, SEO, links, accessibility, and robots.txt, with configurable pass/fail verdicts.MIT- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceWebsite health checker MCP server - SEO audit, accessibility scan, broken link detection, performance analysis, and page comparison.48 npm3MIT
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceEnables running comprehensive website audits from any MCP client, returning actionable plain-language reports covering SEO, accessibility, performance, security, and more.6308 npmMIT
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceProvides on-page SEO analysis via MCP tools, including page audits, schema extraction, robots.txt checks, sitemap parsing, and link analysis. No API keys required; works with any MCP-compatible client.514 npmMIT
TDQS
Scored across 4 tools
http_status and broken_links both report HTTP status codes, but one targets a provided list while the other crawls same-origin; descriptions clarify the boundary. seo_basics and security_headers are clearly distinct from each other and the other tools.
All tools use consistent snake_case noun phrases (http_status, broken_links, seo_basics, security_headers) with no mixing of conventions. The pattern is predictable and readable.
Four focused tools exactly match the site-health domain, each covering a distinct diagnostic area. No tool feels redundant or out of place for the stated purpose.
The set covers status codes, broken links, SEO basics, and security headers, which are core site health checks. However, it lacks common diagnostics like redirect chains, SSL/TLS certificate validity, performance, or accessibility—minor gaps for a comprehensive suite.