Skip to main content
Glama
domondi1

Inferrail

by domondi1
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to Inferrail

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • AgentCost MCP Server

      oneagentlabs
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Provides real-time AI model pricing, cost estimation, and budget management tools to help agents understand and optimize their spending. It enables agents to compare costs across multiple providers and select the most cost-effective models for specific tasks.
      1
      MIT
    • ComputeGauge MCP by ComputeGauge

      ComputeGauge MCPofficial

      ComputeGauge
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Provides cost intelligence and a reputation scoring system to help AI agents optimize spending through smart model selection and local-to-cloud routing. It enables real-time cost tracking and rewards agents for making efficient, high-credibility decisions across various LLM providers.
      Apache 2.0

    • spendguard

      tanveer-arch
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to pre-flight estimate query costs, enforce hard budgets, reconcile actual billed spend, and suggest cheaper rewrites across BigQuery, Snowflake, and Databricks.
      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

    A4.1/5.0

    Scored across 2 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    get_health and get_spend are clearly distinct: one checks gateway reachability and recent receipt, the other aggregates spend from the local ledger. There is no overlap in purpose or side effects.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Both tools follow the same get_ verb_noun convention (get_health, get_spend), creating a predictable and consistent pattern for the server's small surface.

    Tool Count3/5

    With only 2 tools, the server feels thin, though the narrow scope of health and spend monitoring makes the count understandable. It is at the low end of acceptable for a focused read-only utility set.

    Completeness4/5

    The server covers the two core monitoring concerns for an Inferrail gateway: health and spend. Minor gaps like a tool to list available routes or models exist, but the current surface is sufficient for basic observability.

    Maintenance

    ActivityActive
    ResponsivenessSlow

    Resources