KOVA MCP
Related Servers
Alternatives to KOVA MCP
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables Claude to read weclapp data such as customers, invoices, and articles via a secure MCP server.ISC
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables Claude AI to control and manage Homey Pro smart home devices, flows, and analytics through natural language.12MIT
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceEnables Claude or any MCP client to read live and historical Sunsynk inverter, battery, and solar data, plus inverter settings, through the Sunsynk Connect cloud API. It is read-only and lets users ask natural-language questions about generation, consumption, charging, and configuration.7MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceConnects MCP clients such as Claude to a NIBE myUplink heat-pump account, letting users list systems and devices, read sensor values and common parameters, check alarms, view smart-home zones, and write settings where scopes allow. Handles the OAuth2 authorization-code and client-credentials flows, refreshing tokens automatically while keeping credentials in a local .env file.MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceConnects MCP clients (e.g., Claude) to your NIBE myUplink heat-pump account for reading sensors and controlling settings via OAuth2 authentication.2MIT
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceProvides Claude and any MCP client with live access to property management data, enabling operations on properties, units, leases, tenants, work orders, vendors, accounting, and file attachments through natural language.25MIT
TDQS
Scored across 3 tools
The three tools have clearly distinct responsibilities: listing devices, reading state, and describing controller capabilities. However, the describe_capabilities description references 'control_light' and 'control_device' tools that are not present in the set, which could confuse an agent about which tool to use for control operations.
All tool names consistently follow the verb_noun snake_case pattern: list_devices, get_state, describe_capabilities. The naming is perfectly uniform and predictable, with no mixed conventions or unexplained abbreviations.
Three tools is at the low end of what would be appropriate for a smart home server, but since the tools reference dynamic, configuration-driven capabilities, the count is borderline acceptable for a discovery/query-focused surface. However, the absence of any control tools (referenced but not included) makes the surface feel thin for what appears to be a home automation domain.
The surface covers discovery and reading well but is significantly incomplete for control tasks. An agent can list devices, read state, and learn how to control systems, but then hits a dead end because control_light and control_device do not actually exist as tools. The capability descriptions promise actions the server cannot perform, creating a clear gap.