affiliate-networks-mcp
Related Servers
Alternatives to affiliate-networks-mcp
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceMCP server for managing affiliate and referral programs. Track referrals, manage affiliates, process conversions, and handle payouts through AI assistants like Claude, Cursor, and ChatGPT.1823 npm2MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceMCP server that enables AI agents (Claude Code) to manage Criteo campaigns, ad sets, creatives, audiences, and reports via natural language.-
- FlicenseBqualityCmaintenanceA platform-agnostic MCP server that connects Claude to campaign data, institutional knowledge, and historical performance for paid media teams, enabling automated analysis, reporting, and debugging.73-
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceA database-agnostic MCP server that enables natural language queries to your database through Claude or Copilot, automatically writing and executing SQL.84 npmMIT
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceMCP server for managing Youfiliate Smart Links from AI assistants like Claude Desktop, enabling creation of geo-targeted affiliate links, analytics, and YouTube description migrations.18MIT
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceMCP server to manage Meta Ads (Facebook/Instagram) campaigns, ad sets, insights, and audiences from Claude Code using natural language.94 npmMIT
TDQS
Scored across 682 tools
Each tool encodes a network slug plus a distinct action verb, so no two tools perform the same operation on the same network. However, the same 7-tool template repeated across ~60 networks, advertiser variants that differ only by a suffix, and the one-off 'adv' abbreviation make misselection genuinely likely.
Snake_case verb_noun actions like list_programmes, get_programme, and verify_auth are highly consistent across networks. Deviations include hyphenated network slugs, 'advertiser' vs the outlier 'adv' in commission-factory, Awin's divergent tool-specific verbs, and server-level tools sharing the affiliate_ prefix without a network segment.
682 tools is an extreme mismatch for an agent-facing tool surface, far beyond the 50+ threshold. Even a legitimate multi-network adapter should not expose six-plus near-duplicate tools per network as a flat namespace; it overwhelms tool selection and context budgets.
The standard per-network surface—programmes, transactions, earnings, clicks, tracking links, auth—is consistently present for most networks. But write operations are essentially absent (programme applications are browser-handoff stubs), advertiser-side coverage exists for only some networks, and several Awin tools are deliberate not-enabled dead ends.