MCP Omni-Tool
Provides tools for interacting with GitHub's API, enabling AI agents to manage repositories, issues, pull requests, and more.
Provides tools for interacting with Linear's API, enabling AI agents to manage issues, projects, and teams.
Provides tools for interacting with Notion's API, enabling AI agents to manage pages, databases, and content.
Provides tools for interacting with Slack's API, enabling AI agents to send messages, manage channels, and perform other Slack operations.
Provides tools for interacting with Stripe's API, enabling AI agents to manage payments, subscriptions, and billing.
Provides tools for interacting with Twilio's API, enabling AI agents to send SMS, make calls, and manage communication services.
Click on "Install Server".
Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state.
In the chat, type
@followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@MCP Omni-ToolSend a Slack message to #general saying 'Hello from Omni-Tool!'"
That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed.
Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.
๐ฎ MCP Omni-Tool
Stop installing 50 MCP servers. Install one.
One MCP server. Thousands of APIs. Zero config headaches.
Your AI agent shouldn't need 50 different MCP servers to be useful. It needs one that connects to everything.
Get Started โ ยท See Examples โ ยท Get $5 Free Credit โ
๐คฏ The Problem
Every new API your agent needs = another MCP server to find, install, configure, and maintain.
Want Slack, GitHub, Stripe, Twilio, and 46 other services? That's 50 package.json entries, 50 sets of API keys, 50 things that can break on update.
There's a better way.
Related MCP server: REST API MCP Server
โก The Solution
MCP Omni-Tool is a single MCP server powered by AgentClear that gives your AI agent dynamic access to thousands of APIs through one install and one API key.
Your agent discovers what it needs, then calls it โ all through a unified proxy. No per-service config. No dependency hell.
โโโโโโโโโโโโโโโ โโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโ โโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโ
โ Your Agent โโโโโโโถโ MCP Omni-Tool โโโโโโโถโ AgentClear Gateway โ
โ (Claude, โ โ (1 MCP server) โ โ โ
โ Cursor, โ โ โ โ Slack โ GitHub โ
โ etc.) โโโโโโโโ โโโโโโโโ Stripe โ Twilio โ
โโโโโโโโโโโโโโโ โโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโ โ Notion โ Linear โ
โ ... 1000s more โ
โโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโ๐ Quick Start
1. Install
npm install -g mcp-omni-tool2. Get Your API Key
Sign up at agentclear.dev and grab your key (starts with axk_).
๐ Every new account gets $5 in free credit โ no card required.
3. Configure
Add to your MCP client config (e.g. claude_desktop_config.json):
{
"mcpServers": {
"omni-tool": {
"command": "mcp-omni-tool",
"env": {
"AGENTCLEAR_API_KEY": "axk_your_key_here"
}
}
}
}4. Go
That's it. Your agent now has access to thousands of APIs.
๐ Usage
MCP Omni-Tool exposes two core operations to your agent:
discover โ Find Available APIs
Your agent calls discover to search for services matching what it needs.
POST https://agentclear.dev/api/discover
{
"query": "send a Slack message",
"api_key": "axk_your_key_here"
}Response:
{
"services": [
{
"service_id": "slack_post_message",
"name": "Slack โ Post Message",
"description": "Send a message to a Slack channel or DM",
"parameters": {
"channel": "string (required)",
"text": "string (required)",
"thread_ts": "string (optional)"
}
}
]
}proxy โ Call Any Discovered API
Once discovered, your agent calls the service directly through the proxy:
POST https://agentclear.dev/api/proxy/slack_post_message
{
"api_key": "axk_your_key_here",
"params": {
"channel": "#general",
"text": "Deployed v2.4.1 to production โ
"
}
}That's the entire pattern. Discover โ Proxy. Your agent figures out the rest.
๐ Why Omni-Tool?
50 Individual MCP Servers | 1 MCP Omni-Tool | |
Install | 50 packages, 50 configs | 1 package, 1 key |
API Keys | Manage 50 separate keys | 1 AgentClear key |
Updates | 50 packages to keep current | 1 package, always current |
New APIs | Find โ install โ configure โ restart | Already there. Just call it. |
Agent Complexity | Must know which server handles what | Discovers capabilities dynamically |
Failure Surface | 50 potential breaking points | 1 stable gateway |
Setup Time | Hours | 2 minutes |
Cost | $0 + your time ร 50 | $5 free to start |
๐ $5 Free Credit for New Signups
Every new AgentClear account gets $5 in free credit โ no credit card required.
That's enough for hundreds of API calls to test integrations, build prototypes, or just see what your agent can actually do when it has access to everything.
๐ฐ Framework Authors & Template Builders: Earn 40% Revenue Share
Building an MCP-powered template, framework, starter kit, or boilerplate?
Bundle MCP Omni-Tool and earn 40% of the revenue generated by users who sign up through your referral.
How it works:
Include MCP Omni-Tool in your project's MCP config
Register as a referral partner at agentclear.dev/partners
Add your referral tag to the config
Earn 40% rev-share on every user who activates through your template
This isn't an afterthought affiliate program โ it's a core part of the model. We want framework authors to win when their users succeed.
โ Become a Partner
๐ง Supported Clients
MCP Omni-Tool works with any MCP-compatible client:
Claude Desktop
Cursor
Windsurf
Continue
Custom MCP integrations
๐ API Key Format
All AgentClear API keys start with axk_ followed by a unique token:
axk_a1b2c3d4e5f6...Keep your key secure. You can rotate keys at any time from the AgentClear dashboard.
๐ License
MIT ยฉ AgentClear
Built by AgentClear โ the universal API gateway for AI agents.
Available Tools
4 toolscallA
Call a discovered API service through AgentClear's metered proxy. Billed per call. Pass the service_id from a discover result and your payload.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| payload | Yes | JSON payload to send to the service | |
| service_id | Yes | Service ID from a discover result |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations, so description carries full burden. Mentions metered proxy and billing, which is key behavioral info. Lacks details on error handling, idempotency, or return format. Adequate but not deep.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose and billing, then parameter guidance. Every word earns its place. No redundancy.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Covers main points: what, billing, parameter sources. No output schema, so description could hint at return value (e.g., response from service). Sibling 'discover_and_call' suggests combined workflow; description could clarify that this tool is for separate steps. Still fairly complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters. Description adds context (service_id from discover, payload is JSON) but these already appear in schema. No additional meaning beyond schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Clearly states verb 'call' and resource 'discovered API service'. Distinguishes from siblings: 'discover' finds services, 'discover_and_call' combines discovery and call, 'list_services' lists. Adds billing context.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicitly states service_id comes from a discover result, implying prerequisite use of discover. Does not contrast with 'discover_and_call' or specify when not to use, but gives clear direct usage guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
discoverA
Find APIs by describing what you need in natural language. Returns ranked services with pricing and trust scores from the AgentClear marketplace.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Maximum number of results (default 5) | |
| query | Yes | Natural language description of the API capability you need |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses outputs (ranked services with pricing and trust scores) but does not mention side effects, authorization needs, or read-only nature. Adequate but incomplete behavioral disclosure.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two concise sentences that are front-loaded with the primary action. Every word serves a purpose, no redundancy.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given no output schema and low complexity, the description covers the main purpose and output. However, it omits details on how results connect to sibling tools or the exact structure of returned data.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% with clear parameter descriptions. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, maintaining baseline score of 3.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool finds APIs via natural language queries and returns ranked services with pricing and trust scores. It distinguishes from siblings like 'call' (invocation) and 'list_services' (listing without search).
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies when to use (when needing to discover APIs by description) but does not explicitly exclude alternatives or mention when not to use. Clear context but lacking negative guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
discover_and_callA
One-shot: find the best matching API for your query and call it immediately. Combines discover + call in a single step.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | Natural language description of the capability you need | |
| payload | Yes | JSON payload to send to the matched service |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided; description does not disclose behavioral traits like failure handling, authentication, or side effects. Only states combined function.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Single sentence, front-loaded with key concept 'One-shot'. No unnecessary words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
No output schema, no annotations, missing details on behavior and error handling. Incomplete for an agent to rely on without additional context.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. Tool description adds no extra meaning beyond schema, baseline holds.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Clearly states it combines discover and call in a one-shot step, specifying verb and resource. Distinguishes from siblings 'discover' and 'call' by merging them.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Describes use case (one-shot find and call). Does not explicitly state when not to use, e.g., if separate discovery is needed, but context with siblings implies alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
list_servicesC
Browse all available services on the AgentClear marketplace with optional filtering.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Maximum number of results (default 20) | |
| offset | No | Pagination offset |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description must cover behavior. It mentions 'optional filtering' but the only parameters are limit/offset (pagination), not actual filter criteria. This is misleading. No mention of read-only nature or side effects.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Single sentence, very concise. However, the sentence is slightly misleading ('filtering') and lacks completeness. It earns its place but could be improved.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
No output schema, so description should explain what is returned. It does not. Also lacks differentiation from sibling tools. Given the simplicity of the tool, more context is needed for effective use.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema descriptions cover both parameters (limit, offset). However, the description introduces 'optional filtering' which doesn't align with the parameter set, causing confusion. The description adds no meaningful parameter guidance beyond the schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the action (browse), the resource (services), and the context (AgentClear marketplace). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'call' which invokes services, and 'discover' which suggests finding specific ones.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings. Does not mention when not to use or provide alternatives. The description is too brief to help with tool selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Tool Schema Changelog
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
4 tool updates
v1.0.0- First observed
call - First observed
discover - First observed
discover_and_call - First observed
list_services
TDQS
Scored across 4 tools
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: call invokes a discovered service, discover finds APIs, discover_and_call combines both, and list_services browses the marketplace. No overlap in functionality.
Tool names follow a consistent verb-based pattern (call, discover, list_services). The compound discover_and_call is a minor deviation but still clear and predictable.
With 4 tools, the set is well-scoped for an API discovery and calling service. It covers the essential interactions without unnecessary bloat, though a few more tools (e.g., authentication) could be added without clutter.
The tool surface covers the core workflow: discover APIs, browse services, and call them. The combined discover_and_call streamlines common usage. Minor gaps like account management or call history are reasonable omissions for a focused tool.
Maintenance
Resources
Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.
Looking for Admin?
If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.
Related MCP Connectors
Discover and call 10,000+ production APIs from one MCP server. Pay-per-call billing for AI agents.
- APIVerveOAuthcom.apiverve
350+ production-ready APIs through one MCP server โ weather, geocoding, validation, financial data.
Connect to 1,400+ apps and 15,000+ actions through one OAuth-protected MCP server.
One connector URL giving any MCP client live access to 21 services and 51 tools.
Related MCP Servers
- FlicenseCqualityDmaintenanceMCP server that enables deployment and management of MCP servers through a simple configuration-based interface.1-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceA dynamic MCP server that automatically discovers and generates tools from any REST API using OpenAPI/Swagger specifications, enabling instant endpoint access with zero manual configuration.MIT
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceA single MCP server that transparently routes user requests to 83 open-data sources with built-in discovery and autonomous plugin creation.155MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceAn MCP server that provides a single tool for discovering, auto-installing, sandboxing, and calling any API from the printing-press corpus. It enables agents to seamlessly find and execute API operations without per-API setup.MIT