Skip to main content
Glama
docuprox
by docuprox

Related Servers

Alternatives to docuprox-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables Claude to interact with a document processing backend, providing tools for listing, retrieving, uploading, and processing documents, as well as resources for pending documents and statistics.
      -
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables AI assistants to parse and convert PDFs and images to structured text formats using the Doc2x v2 API. Supports asynchronous document processing, format conversion, and file downloads with configurable polling and timeout settings.
      13
      30 npm
      3
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables document parsing, field extraction, PII redaction, contract analysis, chargeback handling, and company enrichment via the Kynth Core API. Provides tools for Claude and any MCP client to process documents and extract structured data.
      52 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables Claude and other MCP-compatible agents to process documents, extract structured data, detect PII, and export LLM-ready datasets through natural language tool calls.
      8
      36 PyPI
      1
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables MCP-compatible agents to run the complete document extraction loop as remote tools: upload files, submit extraction jobs with plain-language instructions, answer clarifying questions, inspect review-needed rows and failed pages, and download results as spreadsheets or JSON.
      MIT

    TDQS

    A3.8/5.0

    Scored across 5 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    The tools are mostly distinct: process_job and process_agent both submit documents but differ clearly by async vs sync behavior, and job_status vs poll_job are differentiated as one-time check vs blocking wait. Minor ambiguity exists between job_status and poll_job since both relate to job progress, but the descriptions adequately clarify their purposes.

    Naming Consistency3/5

    Names are readable and use snake_case, but the pattern is mixed: process_job, process_agent, and poll_job are verb_noun, while job_status and job_results are noun_noun. This inconsistency is noticeable but not chaotic, and each name still conveys its intended function reasonably well.

    Tool Count5/5

    With 5 tools, the server is well-scoped for its purpose: async submission, status checking, polling, result retrieval, and sync submission. Each tool serves a discrete workflow step without unnecessary redundancy.

    Completeness5/5

    The toolkit covers both asynchronous and synchronous processing flows end-to-end: submit, track, wait, and retrieve results. There are no obvious dead ends for the core document-processing use case, and the missing ability to cancel or delete jobs is not essential to the stated purpose.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessNo issues