Skip to main content
Glama
docling-project

Docling MCP

Official
by docling-project
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Related Servers

Alternatives to Docling MCP

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • MCP_Documents

      azzindani
      F
      license
      B
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables local, offline document extraction and manipulation—PDF first but also HTML, DOCX, XLSX, PPTX, EML, EPUB, Markdown, and plain text—through tools for probing, locating, extracting, converting, assembling, OCR, protecting, and redacting documents, with nothing leaving the machine.
      7
      -

    • PDF MCP

      gzigurella
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables PDF processing and analysis including text extraction, metadata retrieval, search, page manipulation, splitting/merging, conversion to images, and form handling.
      10
      MIT

    • PDF MCP Server

      volume19
      F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables processing and analysis of large PDF files through text extraction, search functionality, and intelligent chunking strategies. Provides comprehensive PDF operations including metadata retrieval, page-range text extraction, and content search with contextual results.
      -
    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

    A3.6/5.0

    Scored across 20 tools

    Disambiguation3/5

    Most tools are clearly scoped to specific operations (convert, export, save, search), but there is some overlap between document creation/modification tools (create_new_docling_document vs convert_document_into_docling_document) and between list management tools (open_list, add_list_items, close_list) which could cause confusion. The anchor-based get/update/delete tools are distinct but similar in naming.

    Naming Consistency3/5

    The naming is mostly descriptive and follows a verb_phrase pattern, but it is inconsistent: some tools start with verbs like 'drop', 'is', 'page', 'close', 'convert', 'create', 'export', 'save', 'add', 'open', 'get', 'search', 'update', 'delete'. The pattern is not uniform (e.g., 'drop_document_from_local_cache' vs 'is_document_in_local_cache' vs 'page_thumbnail'), and the long names are verbose but readable.

    Tool Count4/5

    20 tools is on the higher end but still reasonable for a document processing server that covers conversion, caching, editing, and export. The count is slightly heavy but each tool serves a distinct function in the document lifecycle.

    Completeness4/5

    The tool set covers the full document lifecycle: conversion, caching, inspection, editing, and export. Minor gaps exist, such as no explicit tool for removing a document from the cache (though drop_document_from_local_cache exists) and no tool for listing all cached documents, but the core workflows are well covered.

    Maintenance

    ActivityActive
    ResponsivenessSlow

    Resources