Skip to main content
Glama
vilsem-mcp
by bcsnpc

Related Servers

Alternatives to vilsem-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      B
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to author and edit Power BI files locally (.pbix/PBIP), covering semantic models, reports, and Power Query M with 490 tools.
      100
      23 npm
      3
      Cryptographic Autonomy 1.0 (Combined Work Exception)
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to securely connect to your own Power BI or Fabric tenant using your Azure identity, with tools to inspect workspaces and models, run read-only DAX, validate and deploy your own reports, take page screenshots, and enforce guardrails that protect shared resources.
      1
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables an AI assistant to build Power BI projects end to end: data modeling (tables, DAX measures, relationships, calculation groups, roles, field parameters) against an open Power BI Desktop via TOM/XMLA, and reports (pages, visuals, formatting, bookmarks, themes) as PBIR files in a .pbip project. Every visual is cross-checked against the real model before being written, so generated dashboards don't break on open.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      B
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables MCP-compatible AI clients to build and modify Power BI reports through natural language, including pages, visuals, themes, filters, and formatting using local PBIR files without REST API keys or the Power BI service.
      57
      MIT

    TDQS

    A3.7/5.0

    Scored across 15 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Most tools have clearly distinct roles: list_pages/list_visuals/read_visual separate discovery vs full read, update_visual vs commit_visual separate modify vs add. However, several near-pairs require careful reading: validate_visuals (report-level PBIR scan) vs validate_spec (spec without data), and explain_visual vs preview_visual (both resolve a spec, one without render). Descriptions do disambiguate these, but the surface is dense enough that misselection is plausible.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Every tool follows a strict verb_noun snake_case pattern (list_templates, run_dax, validate_visuals, connect_model, get_schema, preview_visual, diff_visual, update_visual, commit_visual). No mixing of styles or vague verbs; the verb choice meaningfully signals the operation type (list/get/read vs validate vs preview vs update/commit).

    Tool Count5/5

    15 tools is at the top of the well-scoped range and each earns its place in a genuine authoring workflow: connection, schema, DAX, discovery, validation, explanation, preview, variant comparison, read, diff, update, and commit. No filler tools are visible and the count reflects a coherent multi-stage pipeline rather than sprawl.

    Completeness4/5

    The lifecycle is nearly full: connect, inspect, validate, explain, preview, compare, list, read, diff, patch, and commit are all present. Gaps remain around destructive/report-structuring operations — there is no delete_visual to remove a committed visual and no page-creation tool, only add-to-existing-page via commit_visual — which agents may need to work around.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo recent community issues