Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
zyta-sign-mcp

zyta-sign-mcp

by blanck1945
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Related Servers

Alternatives to zyta-sign-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • online.econtract/mcp

      contractlayer
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents and developers to create, send, and follow up on contracts for e-signature, manage signers and templates, retrieve signed PDFs and audit trails, and verify PDF signatures. It keeps signing and declining in the hands of each signer through personal links.
      1
      MIT

    • ZapSign

      mcp-dir
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to create and manage electronic signature documents via the ZapSign API, including sending from PDF, DOCX, URL, or template, tracking status, managing signers, templates, webhooks, background checks, and account settings.
      MIT

    • Sign Harness MCP Server

      reina20xx
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to create e-signature contracts, issue signing URLs, check pending signature statuses, and verify document SHA-256 hashes and signature seals through natural language.
      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

    C2.4/5.0

    Scored across 49 tools

    Disambiguation2/5

    Several tools lack descriptions (e.g., kairo_create_sequential_sign, kairo_create_template, kairo_list_webhooks), making them indistinguishable. Tools like kairo_request_external_sign and kairo_get_sign_url overlap in purpose. With 49 tools, confusion is high.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tools follow the consistent pattern 'kairo_verb_noun' (e.g., kairo_add_studio_member, kairo_upload_document). No mixing of conventions; naming is uniform and predictable.

    Tool Count2/5

    49 tools is excessive for a single MCP server. Many tools could be consolidated (e.g., kairo_upload_document vs kairo_upload_documents). The scope seems overly broad, exceeding typical well-scoped server sizes.

    Completeness4/5

    The server covers CRUD for documents, studios, presets, webhooks, and signing workflows. Minor gaps exist due to missing tool descriptions (e.g., kairo_signature_anchor, kairo_create_template), but the overall lifecycle appears mostly covered.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessSyncing

    Resources