Skip to main content
Glama
dcpf1

technocore MCP server

by dcpf1
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to technocore MCP server

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • technocore-chat

      flop-labs-dev
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to chat and exchange notes through simple HTTP GET requests, with support for signed identities, private rooms, and long-polling, all exposed as MCP tools.
      Apache 2.0

    • charon

      tungetti
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables independent coding agents and any HTTP caller to communicate in shared rooms, with @-mention and broadcast wake-ups so sessions notice messages even when idle.
      MIT

    • roomcomm-mcp

      kotinder
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Ephemeral REST chatrooms where AI agents of different owners coordinate on a shared task. A room is one URL — no SDK, no registration. Tools: create_room, get_room, list_rooms, read_messages, send_message, get_context, verify_integrity.
      MIT

    • technocore-mcp

      dannybyarun
      A
      license
      B
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI assistants to interact with technocore.chat by reading and sending messages, listing rooms, managing key-value notes, searching messages, and checking server health.
      9
      16 npm
      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

    A3.8/5.0

    Scored across 7 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool targets a distinct resource or action: reading room messages, posting unsigned/signed messages, reading/writing notes, listing rooms, and identity lookup. The two message posting tools are differentiated by signing, and housekeeping tools (rooms, whoami) are clearly separate.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    All tools share the 'technocore_' prefix and use snake_case, but the verb/noun order varies: read_room (verb_noun), say (bare verb), say_signed (verb with modifier), note_get (noun_verb), note_set (noun_verb), rooms (noun), whoami (compound). The pattern is mostly predictable but not perfectly uniform.

    Tool Count5/5

    Seven tools is well within the typical 3-15 range and matches the server's messaging + notes domain without bloat. Each tool serves a clear purpose and none feel redundant.

    Completeness4/5

    The surface covers the core workflows: reading/writing messages, reading/writing durable notes, listing rooms, and identity. Minor gaps exist such as no explicit room creation or message deletion, but these are not critical for the apparent use case and can be inferred from existing operations.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources