Skip to main content
Glama
gary109

MCP Filesystem Python

by gary109
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to MCP Filesystem Python

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • mcp-readonly-code-server

      John0615
      F
      license
      B
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      A read-only MCP server that exposes a local code workspace to AI clients via stdio, providing file browsing and text search capabilities with path safety rules.
      1
      -

    • Local Knowledge MCP

      TuanLe-bk18
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      A security-first, read-only MCP server that lets clients browse and read text, PDF, and XLSX files from an explicit allowlist of local folders, with strict path and secret protections.
      MIT

    • DocFS

      feli0x
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Read-only filesystem MCP server with .gitignore filtering, multi-root support, and cache for efficient file exploration.
      4
      20
      MIT

    • mcp-file-lens

      solatis
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      An MCP server that provides a flexible lens into directory structures and files, enabling LLM clients to efficiently navigate and understand codebases with minimal noise. It offers secure, gitignore-aware file access with tools like directory listing, file reading, and grep-like search.
      1
      MIT

    • paddock

      JohnXu22786
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      A local filesystem MCP server providing constrained file operations (read/write, directory management, search, metadata) within configurable directories, with read-only mode and zero runtime dependencies.
      2
      MIT
    Deploy Server
    RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

    TDQS

    B3.4/5.0

    Scored across 3 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: deleting, searching, and writing files. No overlap or ambiguity.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tool names follow a consistent verb-noun pattern with hyphens (e.g., delete-file, search-files). No mixing of conventions.

    Tool Count3/5

    With only 3 tools, the server is on the lower end of the ideal range. While each tool is distinct, the count feels thin for a filesystem server.

    Completeness2/5

    Fundamental operations like reading file content or listing directories are missing. Agents cannot perform basic file access, leading to significant gaps.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources