yapi-mcp-bridge
Related Servers
Alternatives to yapi-mcp-bridge
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseBqualityFmaintenanceEnables AI tools to search, create, update, and manage YApi API interfaces, projects, and categories through natural language.1216 npm2MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables interaction with YApi API management platform through natural language, allowing automated interface management including creating/updating APIs, managing categories, importing data, and retrieving project information.9 npm9GPL 3.0
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceMCP server for YApi that enables LLMs to manage API interfaces, projects, and categories through natural language, supporting multiple projects and path fuzzy matching.6 npmGPL 3.0
- FlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceEnables MCP clients to manage YApi projects and interfaces, including searching and creating APIs, editing mock response bodies and advanced mock scripts, managing mock expectations, and testing mock URLs.111-
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceExposes YApi's API management capabilities to MCP clients, enabling operations like listing projects, categories, searching APIs, and managing API details.56 npm2MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityFmaintenanceEnables direct interaction with YApi API management platforms from AI editors like Cursor and Claude Desktop, providing complete interface lifecycle management including browsing, creating, updating, and deleting API documentation.8 npm22MIT
TDQS
Scored across 9 tools
Each tool targets a distinct resource and action: project details, interface retrieval by ID, category listing, interface listing (all or by category), search, and CRUD for categories/interfaces. The overlap between list_interfaces and list_category_interfaces is resolved by clear filtering semantics, so no ambiguity exists.
All tools follow a strict 'yapi_<verb>_<noun>' pattern using snake_case (e.g., yapi_get_project, yapi_create_interface). The verb-noun ordering is uniform, and each name clearly reflects the operation and resource, making the set highly predictable.
With 9 tools, the server is well-scoped for a YApi bridge covering project info, category management, and interface lifecycle. Each tool serves a distinct purpose without redundancy, and the count falls comfortably within the ideal 3-15 range.
The surface covers create, read, and update for interfaces, plus create and list for categories, but lacks delete operations for both interfaces and categories. This is a notable gap for full lifecycle management, though the core workflows (viewing, searching, and editing) are supported.