hybrid-recall
Related Servers
Alternatives to hybrid-recall
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceLocal MCP server for indexing personal knowledge into SQLite with hybrid search, chunk-level citations, memory tools, and agent orchestration.4MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceMCP server for local RAG over personal notes, PDFs, and documents, enabling plain-English querying and hybrid search with multi-hop context expansion.MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceMCP server that enables persistent, hybrid, local memory for LLM agents, with vector + BM25 search, knowledge graph, and policy-driven retention, providing token-budgeted context injection for AI assistants.MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceAn MCP server for managing persistent AI memory using hybrid search (keyword + semantic vector) with SQLite storage and offline-first local embeddings.-
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceUnified MCP server combining hybrid search (vector + BM25 + code graph), structural code analysis, and persistent semantic memory. 15 tools, 25+ languages, <350MB RAM, fully local.10MIT
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceLocal-first RAG MCP server that indexes local documents and provides hybrid search (semantic + keyword) with file ingestion, URL fetching, and a CLI, keeping data on-device.1165MIT
TDQS
Scored across 4 tools
Each tool has a distinct primary domain (sqlite for SQLite and doc search, retrieve for unified cross-source retrieval, memory for persistent key-value store, kg for graph), but retrieval functions overlap—sqlite's docs_search and retrieve both cover docs, and memory/kg each have search. Descriptions help, but an agent might still be uncertain which search to use.
Tool names are all lowercase but mix verb (retrieve) and nouns (sqlite, memory, kg); no consistent verb_noun pattern. Within sqlite, multi-word subcommands use underscores, but tool-level naming is inconsistent.
Four tools is well-scoped for a hybrid recall server covering docs, unified retrieval, memory, and knowledge graph; each earns its place without feeling bloated or sparse.
Covers the main retrieval surfaces (docs, memory, KG, unified) with CRUD on memory and KG and doc search operations; minor gaps like missing bulk document management are present, but core workflows are covered.