Amiqus MCP server
Related Servers
Alternatives to Amiqus MCP server
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceLets MCP clients such as Claude and ChatGPT read a WorkMobile account's jobs, job types, forms, submitted form records, approvals and mobile users, and, when writes are enabled, create and allocate jobs and approve or reject records.10MIT
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceEnables MCP clients such as Claude and ChatGPT to read a Timesheet Portal account, including timesheet time and cost reports, invoices, leave bookings and balances, projects or jobs, clients, users and cost centres, across both the Standard and Recruitment editions. It is read-only, with personal and pay data withheld unless explicitly requested.8MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables Claude, ChatGPT and other MCP clients to read NewZapp account details, campaign reports, open heatmaps, contact groups and contact counts, and to search contacts with personal data withheld by default; when writes are enabled, it can also create and update contacts.MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceLets Claude, ChatGPT and other MCP clients read events and their sessions, attendances (bookings), forms, form responses, contacts, labels and campaigns from a Gecko student recruitment CRM, and, when writes are enabled, register a contact for an event or add a label to a contact. It is read-only by default and keeps contact data minimization rules.MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceLets MCP clients such as Claude and ChatGPT read a rota and time-and-attendance account, exposing venues, groups, shifts, absences and absence types, time entries, venue events and staff names through read-only tools that never return pay data.MIT
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceIt enables MCP clients such as Claude and ChatGPT to read an estate agency's Dezrez Rezi CRM data, including properties and their timelines, people, groups, and offers. It is read-only and applies privacy redactions by default.10MIT
TDQS
Scored across 9 tools
Each tool has a clearly distinct scope: list_clients/get_client target clients, list_records/list_client_records are differentiated by team-wide vs single-client scope, and get_record/get_check target distinct resources. The list vs get pairs are unambiguous, and the descriptions explicitly clarify boundaries.
Most tools follow a clean verb_noun pattern (list_clients, get_client, list_records, get_record, get_check, list_templates, list_webhooks). The lone outlier case_status_summary uses a noun-phrase convention, a minor deviation from the otherwise consistent scheme.
Nine tools is well-scoped for an onboarding domain, covering clients, records, checks, templates, aggregates and webhooks without redundancy. Each tool earns its place and none feels filler.
The read surface is broad and coherent, but the server is entirely read-only: there is no create_client, create_record, or decision/approval action despite the domain centering on onboarding workflows and the templates description referencing create_record. These notable missing write operations limit end-to-end lifecycle coverage.