Skip to main content
Glama
amoljagtap17

users

by amoljagtap17
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to users

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • MCP Server

      GiftBanda
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      A simple MCP server that exposes a createUser tool to add users to a local JSON file via stdio transport.
      360 npm
      1
      MIT

    • mcp-server-enterprise-tools

      sudsho
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      MCP server for regulated enterprises, providing per-tool RBAC, redacted audit logging, and structured error handling. Exposes bank tools for customer lookup, statement search, and dispute resolution over stdio and HTTPS transports.
      MIT

    • paperclip-mcp

      shanewiseman
      F
      license
      C
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Schema-driven MCP server that exposes all Paperclip API operations as typed MCP tools over stdio or Streamable HTTP, supporting both authenticated and local_mode deployments.
      100
      -

    • MCP REST Demo Server

      waqaszafar10p
      F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      A minimal demo MCP server exposing user management tools (list, get, create, update, delete users) over both stdio and HTTP/SSE transports, wrapping an Express REST API to illustrate local vs remote MCP connectivity.
      -
    Deploy Server
    One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

    TDQS

    A3.7/5.0

    Scored across 2 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    The two tools are clearly distinguished by their lookup parameter: email vs. name. Descriptions explicitly state each input, so an agent can confidently select the appropriate tool without ambiguity.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Both tools follow the same verb_noun_by_attribute pattern (get_user_by_...). This is consistent and predictable, making it easy to infer behavior from the name.

    Tool Count3/5

    With only 2 tools, the server feels thin, but the scope may be intentionally limited to user lookup. It is not as extreme as having a single trivial tool, so it sits at the borderline.

    Completeness2/5

    The server only provides read operations for users. There are no create, update, delete, or list endpoints, which are essential for a 'users' domain. This is a significant functional gap that will hinder agents needing full user lifecycle management.

    Maintenance

    ActivitySlowing
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources