Skip to main content
Glama
hvolckaert

helix-mcp-knowledge

by hvolckaert
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to helix-mcp-knowledge

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • evidence-rag

      oguzhanozfe
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables local read-only search and retrieval of approved, current evidence via hybrid lexical and dense methods, with tools to get exact source spans, answer from cited passages, and create and verify recheckable evidence packets.
      MIT

    • Knowledge Fabric

      sagarv48
      A
      license
      B
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      An MCP-native evidence retrieval platform that ingests source material, builds lexical and vector indexes, performs hybrid retrieval, and returns structured evidence packages for AI assistants.
      8
      8
      Apache 2.0

    • agent-kb

      mothieras
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables Agents to retrieve structured evidence with spans, versions, and content hashes from a self-hosted knowledge base, and optionally delegate single-shot questions. Exposes read-only search, evidence lookup, and answer tools over Streamable HTTP with Bearer authentication.
      MIT

    • lemma_docs_mcp

      zackscriven
      F
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables semantic search and retrieval over a locally supplied copy of Lemma's documentation, providing ranked excerpts and full-text chunk access via read-only MCP tools without calling live banking APIs.
      2
      -
    Deploy Server
    One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

    TDQS

    A3.7/5.0

    Scored across 9 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Most tools have clearly distinct roles (active-project management, status checks, search, section retrieval, and listing). The main ambiguity is among the three list_* tools—list_projects, list_products, and list_versions—which describe related catalog concepts and could be confused since list_projects also mentions product versions, but the descriptions do provide enough distinction to disambiguate.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All nine tools follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern (list_projects, get_active_project, set_active_project, get_update_status, get_sync_status, search_docs, get_section, list_products, list_versions). The verbs are also predictable and semantically appropriate (list_ for enumeration, get_ for retrieval, set_ for mutation).

    Tool Count5/5

    Nine tools is well-scoped for a knowledge/retrieval server covering project selection, product/version discovery, status reporting, and document search/retrieval. Each tool appears to earn its place without redundancy.

    Completeness4/5

    The surface covers discovery (projects, products, versions), configuration (set/get active project), status, search, and section-level navigation, which is a coherent read-oriented lifecycle. Minor gap: there is no tool to enumerate documents within a project or fetch an entire document, so users must rely on search_docs plus get_section chunking.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources