Skip to main content
Glama
contact-check

contact-check

Related Servers

Alternatives to contact-check

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables agents to validate email addresses and phone numbers before saving or using them, including syntax, DNS/MX checks, disposable domains, role addresses, typo suggestions, and phone number formats. Supports bulk email validation for up to 50 addresses in a single call.
      MIT
    • F
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables agents to verify postal addresses, email addresses, and phone numbers against Melissa's Global Verification APIs before acting on the data, including batch verification and a per-session call budget to prevent runaway costs.
      4
      -
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables AI-driven data quality operations such as validation, enrichment, and deduplication for customer data fields including email, address, phone, and LinkedIn profiles through natural language interactions.
      2
      MIT
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to verify email addresses in real-time, checking syntax, DNS, MX records, and SMTP handshake, returning verdicts and deliverability scores without sending actual emails.
      -
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables validating and enriching phone numbers, returning validity, international/national formats, carrier, line type, and country/location data.
      280 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables agents to validate email addresses through RFC 5321 syntax checks, MX record lookups, a 182,000-domain disposable blacklist, role-account detection, and an optional SMTP handshake. Runs locally via npx or as a hosted HTTP endpoint, returning explainable per-check scores at zero per-lookup API cost.
      4
      MIT

    TDQS

    A4.3/5.0

    Scored across 3 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool targets a completely distinct contact channel: addresses, emails, and phone numbers. There is no overlap in purpose or output, so an agent can reliably select the right tool based on the input type.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All three tool names follow the exact same check_<plural noun> pattern using snake_case. The naming is uniform and predictable, making the set easy to navigate.

    Tool Count5/5

    Three tools is well-scoped for a contact-checking server. Each tool covers one major contact method without unnecessary bloat or redundancy.

    Completeness4/5

    The server covers the three core contact data types—address, email, and phone—with validation and formatting details. Minor gaps exist, such as lacking a batch/combined contact check or support for other contact identifiers, but the surface is coherent and practical for its stated purpose.