Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to Wikipedia MCP

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      B
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      An MCP server that gives LLMs access to Wikipedia, supporting search, article retrieval, summaries, sections, and related topics across multiple languages and language variants.
      22
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Provides comprehensive Wikipedia access for AI assistants via MCP Streamable HTTP transport, enabling search, article retrieval, summaries, section analysis, link discovery, and multi-language support.
      2
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      An MCP server that exposes a single tool to retrieve Wikipedia articles from local multistream dump files, offering fast offline access with redirect following and fuzzy matching.
      -

    TDQS

    A3.9/5.0

    Scored across 51 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Every tool has a clearly distinct purpose, and descriptions explicitly cross-reference neighboring tools to prevent confusion (e.g., summary vs. simple_summary vs. article_extract, links vs. backlinks vs. external_links, revisions vs. recent_changes vs. revision_diff). Even the large daily-feed and trust-signal clusters are cleanly separated by source and function.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    All tool names use consistent snake_case with no mixed casing or chaotic conventions, which keeps the set readable. However, there is no single predictable pattern like verb_noun; names range from standalone nouns (search, random, quote) to descriptive noun phrases (article_extract, citation_sources, most_linked), so consistency is strong but not perfectly uniform.

    Tool Count1/5

    With 51 tools, the server far exceeds the recommended 3–15 range and lands in the rubric's 50+ extreme-mismatch territory. Even though many tools are distinct, the sheer volume creates unnecessary cognitive load and maintenance surface for what is fundamentally a read-only content-access server.

    Completeness5/5

    For a read-only Wikipedia access server, the surface is exceptionally complete: it covers search, summaries, full text, section navigation, metadata, categories, link graphs, revisions, pageviews, media, daily feeds, quality/trust signals, citations, and editor activity. No obvious lifecycle gaps remain for the stated read-only scope.

    Maintenance

    ActivityActive
    ResponsivenessNo issues