Archestack
OfficialServer Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ARCHESTACK_API_URL | No | Points the server at another copy of the API. The tests use it for a local one. |
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": true
} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| search_projectsA | Find open-source AI projects across both Archestack lists by words and filters. Words match names, repos, taglines, categories and the products a project replaces; results rank by how many words match, then exact names, then projects whose name or category holds the words, then by score. Put hard needs in the filters, not the words (no_gpu instead of "without a GPU"). |
| get_projectA | Everything Archestack has on one project: score and the parts it is made of, place in its category, GitHub facts (stars, license, last commit and release, language, Docker, arm64, GPU, RAM, external services, port), project health, demo and docs links, and the review (summary, audience, strengths, weaknesses). |
| deploy_factsA | The facts an agent needs before installing or deploying one project: Docker files, arm64 build, GPU need, minimum RAM, outside services it needs, web port, what its README says it needs, docs and demo links, and upkeep (latest release, releases in 12 months, security advisories, its package). null means Archestack does not know. Archestack does not track hosting cost or deploy templates. |
| top_in_categoryA | The ranking of one category, best first, with score and tagline. An unknown category returns the list of categories. |
| compareA | Put 2 to 4 projects side by side: score and its parts, place, stars, license, last commit, Docker, arm64, GPU, RAM, external services, strengths and weaknesses. |
| alternatives_toA | Open-source projects that replace a paid or closed product (e.g. Cursor, ChatGPT, Notion), highest score first. own_claim is true when the project says so in its own README. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 6 tools
Tools have mostly distinct purposes: search, detail, deployment facts, category ranking, compare, and alternatives. However, get_project and deploy_facts overlap significantly, as get_project already includes deployment-related facts; an agent may be unsure which to use for deployment queries.
Naming is inconsistent: search_projects, get_project, and deploy_facts follow verb_noun, but top_in_category is a noun phrase, compare is a bare verb, and alternatives_to is a noun+preposition. The mix is readable but not predictable.
Six tools is well within the ideal range for a project-discovery server. Each covers a distinct workflow, though the overlap between get_project and deploy_facts suggests slight redundancy rather than a count issue.
The set covers search, detailed project info, deployment facts, category rankings, comparisons, and alternatives, which addresses the main discovery and evaluation workflows. Minor gaps like bulk export or filtering by specific metrics are not critical.