Skip to main content
Glama
dziuba0x

flare-mcp

by dziuba0x
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Related Servers

Alternatives to flare-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • Corvus

      Allen-Saji
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Solana DeFi Intelligence MCP server enabling natural language queries for wallet analytics, DeFi positions, protocol metrics, and token prices.
      8
      1
      MIT

    • Mantle Yield MCP

      Urazanev
      F
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Universal MCP server for Mantle yield data, enabling users to fetch health status, dashboard summaries, and detailed opportunity information through natural language.
      7
      -

    • Merkl MCP Server

      domechn
      A
      license
      C
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      MCP server providing tools to search, get, and aggregate Merkl opportunities. Enables querying campaign data, APRs, TVL, and more through natural language.
      13
      33 npm
      MIT

    • solana-nft-mcp

      p1xelapp
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Read-only MCP server that enables natural-language queries about Solana NFTs, including ownership history, freeze/burn rights, marketplace sales and floors with source and currency, directly from the chain and marketplaces without sign-up.
      21
      59 npm
      1
      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

    B3.4/5.0

    Scored across 24 tools

    Disambiguation3/5

    Most tools serve clearly distinct purposes, but there is real overlap: get_fassets_status is largely superseded by fassets_system_state, get_flr_balance is a subset of get_flr_stake_info, and get_ftso_feed versus get_ftso_anchor_feed are easy to confuse without reading descriptions. The detailed descriptions help, but the boundaries are not always crisp.

    Naming Consistency3/5

    The set is consistently snake_case, but the naming pattern is mixed: some tools start with get_, others use domain prefixes like fdc_/ fassets_/ evidence_, and songbird_fcc_registry does not follow a verb pattern at all. Word order also varies, such as fdc_web2json_request versus fdc_request_attestation.

    Tool Count3/5

    24 tools is at the heavy end of the acceptable range, and the server covers several protocol families rather than one focused workflow. Each family has useful tools, but the broad scope and near-redundant status/balance tools make the set feel slightly bloated.

    Completeness4/5

    Core workflows are well covered: reading state, requesting and retrieving FDC proofs, verifying proofs against the on-chain Relay root, and bundling evidence for downstream verification. Minor gaps exist, such as no dedicated generic verifier for Payment or AddressValidity attestations, but agents can work around them.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources