A
licenseNot graded
qualityC
maintenanceMCP server for Feishu/Lark API integration, enabling AI agents to send messages, manage groups, create and edit documents and spreadsheets, and search knowledge bases.
MIT
mdymcp
Related Servers
Alternatives to mdymcp
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables AI agents to access unified development tools including code generation, documentation synchronization, test case rendering, and architecture graph queries through a single MCP server.-
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceProxies MCP tools from Mingdao cloud, enabling Coze to use them securely without exposing Mingdao tokens.-
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceMCP server for Mingdao Worksheet API. Enables listing worksheets, querying records, and performing CRUD operations on Mingdao (明道云) works through natural language.1371MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceOfficial MCP server for Feishu/Lark OpenAPI, enabling AI assistants to interact with Feishu/Lark platform for document processing, messaging, calendar scheduling, and more.4,817MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceA comprehensive MCP server providing over 390 tools across 66 providers, including major SaaS platforms like GitHub, Slack, and Stripe. It enables AI assistants to interact directly with a wide array of public APIs and utility services through a single interface.-
TDQS
C2.8/5.0
Scored across 50 tools
Disambiguation4/5
Most tools have distinct purposes through different resource+verb combinations (e.g., calendar_get_events vs calendar_search), but the sheer number of similar 'get' tools and overlapping scope (e.g., post_get_all_posts vs post_get_group_posts) may cause occasional misselection. Overall, descriptions help differentiate.
Naming Consistency4/5
Tools consistently follow a prefix_verb_noun snake_case pattern (e.g., group_create, post_delete_post). Minor inconsistencies exist like 'webchat_get_message_by_id' vs 'webchat_get_messages' and 'post_add_post' redundancy, but the pattern is predictable.
Tool Count2/5
With 50 tools, the set is far beyond the typical well-scoped range (3-15). Although the platform covers many domains, the high count risks overwhelming agents and increasing selection errors. A more focused subset would improve usability.
Completeness3/5
The tool set covers major CRUD-like operations for calendars, posts, groups, and chat, but lacks some obvious actions like group deletion, user information updates, or file handling. The coverage is decent but not fully comprehensive for the implied collaboration domain.
Maintenance
ActivityNo data
ResponsivenessNo issues