Connhex MCP Server
OfficialRelated Servers
Alternatives to Connhex MCP Server
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceConnect your AI workflows to the ThingsBoard IoT Platform through this MCP server. Enables LLMs to query device telemetry, manage IoT entities (devices, assets, customers), and analyze sensor data - all through natural language. Perfect for building AI-powered IoT monitoring, predictive maintenance,98Apache 2.0

Ubidots MCP Serverofficial
AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables MCP clients to interact with the Ubidots IoT platform for managing IoT devices, data, and automation through natural language.MIT- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables users to connect to and manage various Cloudflare services such as Workers, observability, DNS analytics, and more through natural language interactions via MCP clients.Apache 2.0

OpenRemote MCP Serverofficial
AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables interaction with an OpenRemote instance through its service API, allowing management of assets, users, and other resources via natural language.AGPL 3.0- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables conversational API testing via MCP, allowing users to make HTTP requests, decode JWT tokens, and validate JSON schemas through natural language.-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables natural language management of Coolify self-hosted PaaS, including applications, databases, deployments, servers, and environment variables via MCP.MIT
TDQS
Scored across 30 tools
There is significant overlap between generic resource tools (create_resource, delete_resource, etc.) and manufacturing resource tools (create_manufacturing_resource, etc.), with identical descriptions. This creates ambiguity about when to use each set. Other tools like read_channel_messages and read_thing_messages are more distinct.
Nearly all tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (e.g., create_resource, list_things, get_rule). The only slight outlier is whoami, but it is a common convention. Naming is highly predictable and uniform across domains.
With 30 tools, the server covers multiple domains (generic resources, manufacturing, rules, things, models, messages, user info). However, the explicit duplication of CRUD tools for generic and manufacturing resources inflates the count unnecessarily. The scope is broad but the count is borderline high.
The tool surface has notable gaps: things can only be read/fetched (no create, update, or delete), models lack CRUD beyond get/list, and channels only support reading messages. Full CRUD is only present for resources (generic and manufacturing) and rules. The absence of basic lifecycle operations for core entities (things, models) will likely cause agent failures.