A
licenseA
qualityD
maintenanceIntegrates with Overleaf's Git feature to manage LaTeX projects directly from MCP-enabled environments, enabling cloning, syncing, and pushing changes between local machine and Overleaf.
5
14 npm
MIT
Overleaf MCP Server
Related Servers
Alternatives to Overleaf MCP Server
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceProvides access to Overleaf projects via Git integration, allowing Claude and other MCP clients to read LaTeX files, analyze document structure, and extract content.6139 npm296MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables AI clients to read and edit Overleaf projects through the official git bridge, with local staging of changes and conflict detection before publishing.44 npmMIT
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceEnables AI agents to read, write, compile, and manage Overleaf projects through MCP, including file operations, project administration, and LaTeX compilation diagnostics.1615 npmMIT
- FlicenseCqualityCmaintenanceEnables MCP clients to inspect and modify local git repositories by running commands such as status, log, diff, add, commit, branch, and stash. Push operations are not performed locally; instead diffs are sent to a configurable HTTP API that handles the upload, with all other remote git commands blocked.27-
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceExposes a secure, path-confined bridge to a local workspace and git remotes, enabling MCP clients to search, read, write, reset files, and perform git operations.-
TDQS
B3.4/5.0
Scored across 4 tools
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool targets a distinct action: listing, reading, syncing, or writing files. No overlap in functionality, enabling clear agent selection.
Naming Consistency5/5
All tool names follow the consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., list_files, write_file), making them predictable and easy to parse.
Tool Count4/5
With 4 tools covering file listing, reading, writing, and syncing, the scope is narrow but sufficient for basic project management. Slightly minimal but not undercutting usability.
Completeness3/5
Core file operations (list, read, write, sync) are present, but deletion and renaming are missing. This gap could force agents to work around limitations in file lifecycle management.
Maintenance
ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues