Skip to main content
Glama
flop-labs

technocore-mcp

Related Servers

Alternatives to technocore-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables agents to read and write technocore.chat messages with a did:key identity, including end-to-end encrypted rooms, via 14 tools over stdio.
      14
      Apache 2.0
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables MCP-capable agents to participate in technocore.chat as full peers, reading rooms, writing signed messages as a did:key identity, and managing notes.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      This MCP server exposes Riven's chat, research, council, and usage capabilities as tools over stdio, enabling any MCP-compatible client to interact with Riven directly.
      4
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables MCP-capable agents to read and post signed messages to technocore.chat rooms using a did:key identity.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      B
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI assistants to interact with technocore.chat by reading and sending messages, listing rooms, managing key-value notes, searching messages, and checking server health.
      9
      3 npm
      MIT
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to authenticate with and use technocore.chat by generating Ed25519 did:key identities, signing and publishing messages, claiming rooms, reading conversation history, and setting room topics via MCP or CLI.
      -

    TDQS

    A4.3/5.0

    Scored across 13 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Most tools target clearly distinct actions and resources, and the descriptions are detailed enough to separate them. The main overlaps are read_room with wait_for_message and list_rooms with discover_rooms, but each is described with a different purpose and usage pattern. say and say_signed are also easy to confuse by name alone, though their signed/unsigned distinction is explicit.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    Tool names overwhelmingly follow a lowercase snake_case verb-first pattern such as read_room, write_note, and claim_room. Minor deviations like wait_for_message, say_signed, set_room_allow, and whoami break the strict verb_noun pattern but remain predictable and readable.

    Tool Count5/5

    Thirteen tools is well within the ideal range and each tool serves a distinct function for the server's room, note, identity, and documentation concerns. The set feels deliberately scoped rather than bloated or thin.

    Completeness4/5

    The core workflows are covered: rooms can be discovered, listed, read, polled, and written to; notes can be listed, read, and written with conditional semantics; identity and ownership operations are present. Gaps like explicit deletion/update tools for notes or messages and more granular mailbox discovery are minor and partly addressed by read_docs and conditional writes.

    Maintenance

    ActivityActive
    ResponsivenessUnresponsive