Skip to main content
Glama
jim-coyne

Hyperfabric MCP Server

by jim-coyne
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Related Servers

Alternatives to Hyperfabric MCP Server

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • network-mcp

      E-Conners-Lab
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Provides AI assistants with direct access to multi-vendor network devices for tasks like configuration management, health checks, and topology discovery through 35 specialized tools. It enables natural language control over platforms including Cisco, Juniper, and Nokia using SSH, NETCONF, and SNMP protocols.
      11
      MIT

    • Intersight MCP Server

      jim-coyne
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables LLMs to interact with Cisco Intersight APIs for managing data center infrastructure, including server monitoring, policy management, network configuration, and hardware telemetry across 199 tools.
      9
      MIT

    • HPE Aruba Networking Central

      the-otner
      F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Exposes 90 production-grade tools for interacting with the complete HPE Aruba Networking Central REST API surface, including network inventory, configuration, and security management. It features enterprise-ready OAuth2 handling and semantic tool filtering for optimized performance with both hosted and local LLMs.
      -

    • pyATS MCP Server

      sunayan22doli-bit
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to directly inspect, configure, test, and orchestrate network devices through pyATS/Genie, including show command parsing, config rollback, feature state learning/diffing, fleet-wide command fan-out, and declarative test execution.
      MIT
    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

    B3/5.0

    Scored across 79 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Tools are well-organized by resource categories (auth, devices, fabrics, nodes, etc.) with clear distinctions between actions like get, add, update, and delete. However, some potential overlaps exist, such as multiple 'add' tools for different sub-resources within a category that might be confusing if the agent doesn't carefully parse the resource type.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Naming follows a highly consistent pattern: resourceActionResource or resourceActionResources (e.g., authGetUser, fabricsAddFabrics, nodesUpdatePort). All tools use camelCase uniformly, and the verb-noun structure is predictable across all 79 tools, making them easy to parse and understand.

    Tool Count2/5

    With 79 tools, the count is excessive for typical MCP server purposes, likely overwhelming for agents and users. While the domain (network fabric management) is complex, this many tools suggests over-fragmentation of operations that could have been consolidated, making it heavy and difficult to navigate.

    Completeness5/5

    The tool set provides comprehensive CRUD coverage across all major resources (fabrics, nodes, ports, VRFs, VNIs, etc.), including lifecycle operations like commit, revert, and review for candidates. No obvious gaps are present; agents can perform full management workflows without dead ends.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources