用于 Claude 的模型上下文协议 (MCP) 服务器与Evolution API集成以实现 WhatsApp 自动化。
该 MCP 服务器允许 Claude 通过 Evolution API 与 WhatsApp 进行交互，从而实现以下功能：
管理 WhatsApp 实例
发送各种类型的消息
与联系人和群组合作
配置 webhook 和设置
Related MCP server: Evolution API MCP Server
mcp-evo-api/
├── src/
│ ├── tools/ # MCP tools implementation for Evolution API
│ ├── utils/ # Shared utilities, including Evolution API client
│ ├── main.ts # Server entry point
│ └── types.ts # Shared type definitions
├── scripts/ # Helper scripts
├── biome.json # Linting configuration
├── tsconfig.json # TypeScript configuration
├── docker-compose.yml # Docker Compose configuration
├── Dockerfile # Docker build configuration
└── package.json # Project dependencies使用您的 Evolution API 凭证创建一个.env文件：
EVOLUTION_API_URL=https://your-evolution-api-server.com
EVOLUTION_API_KEY=your-api-key-here环境 | 步骤 | 命令 |
本地开发 | 1. 克隆并安装2. 以开发模式运行 |
|
本地生产 | 1. 克隆并安装2. 构建并运行 |
|
Docker Compose | 使用 Docker Compose 运行 |
|
Docker | 构建并运行容器 |
|
将其添加到您的 Claude Desktop 配置文件（通常位于~/Library/Application Support/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json ）：
{
"mcpServers": {
"evo-api": {
"command": "node",
"args": [
"/path/to/your/mcp-evo-api/dist/main.js"
]
}
}
}如果使用 Docker 部署：
{
"mcpServers": {
"evo-api": {
"url": "http://localhost:3000"
}
}
}类别 | 实施的 | 待实施 |
核心 API | ✅ 获取信息✅ 创建实例✅ 获取实例✅ 实例连接✅ 重启实例✅ 连接状态✅ 注销实例✅ 删除实例✅ 设置状态 | ❌ 检查 WhatsApp |
Webhook 和设置 | ✅ 设置 Webhook✅ 查找 Webhook✅ 设置设置✅ 查找设置 | |
消息传递 | ✅ 发送纯文本✅ 发送状态✅ 发送媒体✅ 发送 WhatsApp 音频✅ 发送贴纸✅ 发送位置✅ 发送联系方式✅ 发送反应✅ 发送投票✅ 发送列表✅ 发送按钮 | ❌ 将消息标记为已读 ❌ 将消息标记为未读 ❌ 存档聊天 ❌ 删除所有人的消息 ❌ 更新消息 ❌ 发送状态（聊天控制） |
聊天和联系人 | ✅ 查找联系人✅ 查找聊天 | ❌ 更新阻止状态❌ 获取个人资料图片 URL❌ 获取 Base64❌ 查找消息❌ 查找状态消息 |
团体 | ✅ 通过 JID 查找群组✅ 获取所有群组✅ 查找群组成员 | ❌ 创建群组 ❌ 更新群组图片 ❌ 更新群组主题 ❌ 更新群组描述 ❌ 获取邀请码 ❌ 撤销邀请码 ❌ 发送群组邀请 ❌ 通过邀请码查找群组 ❌ 更新群组成员 ❌ 更新群组设置 ❌ 切换临时群组 ❌ 离开群组 |
个人资料设置 | ❌ 获取商业资料❌ 获取资料❌ 更新资料名称❌ 更新资料状态❌ 更新资料图片❌ 删除资料图片❌ 获取隐私设置❌ 更新隐私设置 | |
机器人集成 | ❌ Typebot 集成❌ OpenAI 集成❌ Evolution Bot❌ Dify Bot❌ Flowise Bot | |
其他集成 | ❌Chatwoot❌Websocket❌SQS❌RabbitMQ |
有关更多信息，请参阅Evolution API 文档。
Hello tool
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | The name of the person to greet |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Hello tool' reveals nothing about what the tool actually does operationally - whether it's a read operation, a write operation, what permissions might be needed, what side effects occur, or what the response format might be. This is a complete failure to describe behavioral traits.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
While technically concise with just two words, this is under-specification rather than effective brevity. The description fails to provide any meaningful information about the tool's function. True conciseness would efficiently convey essential information, but this description is so sparse it's essentially non-functional.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description 'Hello tool' is completely inadequate. It doesn't explain what the tool does, how to use it, what it returns, or any behavioral characteristics. The single parameter is well-documented in the schema, but the overall description fails to provide the contextual understanding needed to effectively use this tool.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema has 100% description coverage, with the single parameter 'name' clearly documented as 'The name of the person to greet.' The description 'Hello tool' adds no additional parameter information beyond what's already in the schema. With complete schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate since the schema does all the work.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description 'Hello tool' is a tautology that merely restates the tool name without specifying what the tool actually does. It doesn't provide a verb-action combination or clarify the tool's function beyond the obvious implication from the name. While the name suggests greeting functionality, the description fails to explicitly state this purpose.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides absolutely no guidance on when to use this tool. There are no sibling tools mentioned, so differentiation isn't needed, but the description doesn't indicate any context, prerequisites, or appropriate scenarios for invoking this tool. It's completely devoid of usage instructions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
hello_toolWith only one tool, there is no possibility of ambiguity or overlap between tools, as there are no other tools to compare it against. The single tool's purpose is inherently distinct by default.
A single tool cannot demonstrate inconsistency, as there are no other tool names to compare it to. The naming pattern for 'hello_tool' (snake_case) is consistent within the set, albeit trivially so.
A single tool is generally too few for most server purposes, as it limits functionality and suggests an incomplete or trivial implementation. While it might be appropriate for a minimal 'hello world' server, it is inadequate for any substantive domain coverage.
With only one tool named 'hello_tool', it is impossible to infer a meaningful domain or assess coverage. There are obvious gaps, as no CRUD operations, lifecycle management, or typical API interactions are present, making the surface severely incomplete for any practical purpose.
Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.
If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.
Drive WhatsApp from any MCP client: pair devices, send text and media, manage contacts and groups.
Drive your real WhatsApp inbox from Claude — send, reply, label, assign, and triage via TimelinesAI.
A comprehensive Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that enables AI assistants to interact with yo…
Model Context Protocol server for the Apideck Unified API. Connect any MCP-compatible agent framework to 100+ accounting systems, HRIS platforms, file storage providers, and more through one integration. More information https://www.apideck.com/mcp-server
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/aiteks-ltda/mcp-evolution-whatsapp-api'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server
