Skip to main content
Glama
chelsea-zhou

AIE7-MCP

by chelsea-zhou
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to AIE7-MCP

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • metasearch-mcp

      YeonwooSung
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      MCP server for using various search tools like Tavily API. Planning to support various search tools (i.e. wiki search, searxng, etc)
      3
      MIT

    • AIE7-hw13-mcp

      kvaliotti
      F
      license
      B
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      MCP server using Tavily API for web search, enabling web search queries via stdio transport.
      5
      -

    • Tavily Web Search MCP Server

      julie-berlin
      F
      license
      C
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables web search capabilities through the Tavily API, allowing users to search the internet for information using natural language queries. Demonstrates MCP server implementation with external API integration.
      3
      -

    • mcp-server

      jsmejia78
      F
      license
      B
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      MCP server that provides web search functionality using the Tavily API. It runs in stdio transport mode and can be integrated with Cursor or other MCP clients.
      3
      -
    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

    A3.5/5.0

    Scored across 3 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool addresses a completely different use case—web search, dice rolling, and holiday lookup—so there is no overlap or confusion between them.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (web_search, roll_dice, check_holiday), making the API predictable and easy to navigate.

    Tool Count4/5

    With 3 tools, the set is lean but not unreasonably so; however, the tools are unrelated, so the overall scope feels somewhat scattered rather than cohesive, which is why it's not a perfect 5.

    Completeness3/5

    The server lacks a clear domain, so completeness is hard to evaluate; while each tool is self-contained, there is no broader workflow that reveals obvious gaps, but also no evidence of comprehensive coverage of a unified purpose.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources