Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to WayStation MCP Server

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      B
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables seamless and secure connectivity between MCP hosts (like Claude Desktop, Cline, or Cursor) and productivity tools through WayStation's no-code integration hub.
      71
      28 npm
      62
      MIT
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Self-hosted MCP gateway that connects Claude, ChatGPT, and other AI agents to 20+ enterprise tools (GitLab, Jira, Notion, Google Workspace, Slack, Grafana, …) with OAuth, audit logs, and zero data leaving your infrastructure
      -
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Open-source MCP hub providing a single endpoint for AI agents to access dozens of business integrations (CRMs, spreadsheets, telephony, ads) with multi-tenancy, OAuth, and context-efficient tool discovery.
      Apache 2.0
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Provides AI agents with 220+ tools for building websites, sending email, managing contacts, invoicing, databases, automation, and more through a single secure connection. Features hardware-bound authentication and works with Claude Desktop, Claude Code, Cursor, and other MCP-compatible clients.
      -
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      MCP Hub is a self-hosted AI operations platform that provides a unified MCP gateway with semantic tool routing, persistent vector memory, automation, and multi-agent flows. It enables connecting any MCP client to 130+ tools across 12 integrations through just 3 hub endpoints.
      4
      MIT

    TDQS

    C2.9/5.0

    Scored across 71 tools

    Disambiguation3/5

    While most tools target a specific resource and action, there is notable overlap across similar tools (e.g., readLinearProject includes all issues while listLinearIssues also lists issues, and listAsanaProjects/readAsanaProject/listAsanaTasks/task searching have blurred boundaries). Tool names and descriptions help disambiguate, but the sheer number of parallel CRUD operations across many apps increases the chance of selecting the wrong one.

    Naming Consistency3/5

    The naming generally follows a consistent pattern of verb + provider + resource (e.g., listJiraProjects, createLinearIssue), but the verbs are inconsistent: getMiroBoard vs readJiraProject vs fetchPostgreSQLSchema, and create vs add vs post for similar actions (createJiraComment, addJiraComment, postMiroNote). Also, helloWayStation and openWayStation deviate from the convention, making the set feel somewhat mixed.

    Tool Count1/5

    With 71 tools, the server is far beyond the typical well-scoped range. Although it aggregates many integrations, the high count reflects a broad but shallow surface across 15+ services. This is an extreme number that will overwhelm agents and complicate tool selection.

    Completeness3/5

    The tool surface covers core workflows for a wide array of apps (Jira, Linear, Asana, Gmail, etc.) but has notable gaps: no delete operations in most apps, no update for Miro/Notion docs, and read-only database access. Some integrations lack essential actions (e.g., Teams cannot read channel history, Office docs cannot be created/edited). Overall, the set is broad but not deep, with agents likely hitting dead ends for modifications beyond basic creation and updates.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessSyncing