Skip to main content
Glama
anchetadev

AI Impact MCP

by anchetadev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to AI Impact MCP

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • Carbon Tracking MCP

      nathanwbailey
      A
      license
      B
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables users to ask directly within a Claude Code or Codex chat how much energy and CO2eq their current session or entire project has consumed, estimated locally from session logs with no telemetry or network calls. It also reports everyday-activity equivalents such as kettle boils or washing machine cycles for the resulting figures.
      2
      MIT
    • WattScope by WattScope

      WattScopeofficial

      WattScope
      F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      WattScope helps teams see the carbon cost of the AI they are already using. Ask Claude to record a piece of work and it attributes the estimated footprint to your organization and to a project, then reports it back — per session, per project, or organization-wide. Every figure is an estimate, and carries the strength of the evidence behind it.
      -

    • green-mcp

      rlawogh1005
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Measures CPU energy and LLM token usage of programs to enable cost-efficient refactoring, using real hardware telemetry and a non-blocking token proxy.
      6
      MIT

    • thirsty-tokens

      evanwang810
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Estimates data-center water consumption from local Claude Code transcripts, providing water usage summaries, breakdowns by model/project, and a compact HTML widget.
      MIT
    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

    A3.6/5.0

    Scored across 9 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Most tools have clearly distinct purposes (e.g., estimate_impact vs. log_usage), but some overlap exists: efficiency_score and analyze_efficiency both address efficiency, and record_web_chat and log_usage both handle logging. Descriptions mitigate confusion.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    Names consistently use lowercase with underscores (e.g., analyze_efficiency, set_scenario). Most follow a verb_noun pattern, but efficiency_score is noun_verb, and verbs vary (analyze, estimate, log, scan). Minor inconsistency.

    Tool Count5/5

    9 tools is well-scoped for tracking AI usage, estimating environmental impact, and reporting. Each tool has a clear role, with no obvious bloat or deficiency.

    Completeness4/5

    Covers core logging (manual, web, session scans), estimation, efficiency analysis, reporting, and scenarios. Missing CRUD for logged records (e.g., delete or edit) and export, but primary workflows are present.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources