This MCP server provides tools to discover and search for available Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers in the MCP Registry.
List and Search: Browse through available MCP servers with optional search capabilities
Pagination Support: Handle large result sets using cursor-based pagination with configurable limits (1-100 servers, default 50)
Custom Registry URLs: Support for custom MCP registry endpoints beyond the default official registry
Semantic Analysis Ready: Returns raw server data optimized for semantic analysis and processing
VS Code Integration: Can be installed and used directly within VS Code or VS Code Insiders
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 Registry Server list MCP servers with a limit of 20"
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.
A Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that provides tools to interact with the MCP Registry. This server allows you to discover and search for available MCP servers in the registry.
List MCP Servers: Browse and search through available MCP servers in the registry
Pagination Support: Handle large result sets with cursor-based pagination
Custom Registry URLs: Support for custom MCP registry endpoints
Semantic Search Ready: Returns raw server data optimized for semantic analysis
Related MCP server: MCP Servers Search
Node.js 20+
Install the MCP server in VS Code using below buttons:
Alternatively, you can add configuration in mcp.json:
{
"servers": {
"mcp-registry": {
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"-y",
"mcp-server-mcp-registry@latest"
]
}
}
}list_mcp_serversLists MCP servers from the MCP Registry with optional pagination and filtering.
Parameters:
limit (optional): Maximum number of servers to return (1-100, default: 50)
cursor (optional): Pagination cursor for retrieving next set of results
registry_url (optional): Base URL of the MCP Registry API (defaults to https://registry.modelcontextprotocol.io/v0/servers)
List MCP servers from the MCP Registry with optional pagination. Returns raw server data for semantic analysis.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Maximum number of servers to return (1-100, default: 50) | |
| cursor | No | Pagination cursor for retrieving next set of results | |
| registry_url | No | Base URL of the MCP Registry API (defaults to official registry - https://registry.modelcontextprotocol.io/v0/servers) |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'Returns raw server data for semantic analysis' which hints at the output format, but lacks critical details like rate limits, authentication requirements, error conditions, or what 'raw server data' specifically entails.
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?
The description is efficiently structured in two sentences that directly address the tool's function and output. It avoids unnecessary verbiage, though it could be slightly more front-loaded by explicitly stating it's a read-only operation.
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?
For a read operation with 3 well-documented parameters but no output schema or annotations, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the basic purpose and output type but lacks details about response format, error handling, and practical usage scenarios that would make it more 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?
The input schema has 100% description coverage, providing clear documentation for all 3 parameters. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema, so it meets the baseline score of 3 for adequate but not enhanced coverage.
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 ('List MCP servers') and resource ('from the MCP Registry'), and specifies the optional pagination feature. It distinguishes the tool's purpose well, though without sibling tools to differentiate from, it cannot achieve a perfect score of 5.
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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, prerequisites, or specific contexts. It mentions 'optional pagination' but doesn't explain when pagination is needed or how to handle large result sets.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
With only one tool, there is no possibility of ambiguity or overlap between tools. The tool's purpose is clearly defined and distinct by default.
A single tool inherently exhibits perfect naming consistency, as there are no other tools to compare against. The name 'list_mcp_servers' follows a clear verb_noun pattern.
One tool is too few for a server named 'MCP Registry Server', which implies a registry management domain. A single list operation lacks essential functionality like search, get details, add, update, or delete servers, making the scope incomplete.
The tool surface is severely incomplete for a registry server. It only provides listing with pagination, missing core operations such as retrieving specific server details, registering new servers, updating existing entries, or removing servers, which are critical for registry management.
Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.
If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.
Publish and discover MCP servers via the official MCP Registry. Powered by HAPI MCP server.
Search and browse every MCP server in the Model Context Protocol registry.
Search the official MCP registry: 17,000+ servers with trust grades, stars, tools, install config.
Search and discover 25,000+ MCP servers across all major registries. Connect and pay autonomously.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/formulahendry/mcp-server-mcp-registry'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server