Astronomer MCP Server
Related Servers
Alternatives to Astronomer MCP Server
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables astronomy research by orchestrating specialized agents to access astronomical data tools (DESI, LSST, etc.) and perform analysis, simulations, and literature review.1MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceIt equips LLM clients with roughly 200 live astronomy research tools spanning ALMA/NRAO, MAST, ESO, VO archives, SIMBAD/NED/VizieR, Splatalogue, NASA ADS, Data Lab, ZTF and imaging, with plots and images returned inline. Users can search and cross-match archives, identify spectral lines, pull literature and BibTeX, and run photometry, SED and variability analysis against real data.-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables AI agents to query NASA/JPL data on asteroids and comets, including small-body orbits and physical parameters, near-Earth close approaches, Sentry impact-risk assessments, and recent atmospheric fireballs. All four tools are keyless and work over a hosted gateway endpoint or a local stdio server.302 npmMIT
- AlicenseBqualityBmaintenanceEnables AI agents to investigate real time-domain astronomy archive data through MCP tools for light curves, changepoints, microlensing fits, artifact checks, and recording checkable claims, hypotheses, and sealed predictions with provenance.26MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceProvides unified natural language access to 40+ astronomical databases and surveys including DESI, SIMBAD, SDSS, and Gaia, enabling researchers to search, retrieve, and analyze astronomical data without learning complex APIs.6-
- AlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceMCP server that provides tools to query 17+ astronomical databases (e.g., SIMBAD, VizieR, Gaia) via HTTP/TAP APIs, enabling AI applications to access astronomical data through natural language.2322 npm2BSD 3-Clause
TDQS
Scored across 51 tools
Most tools are distinguishable by resource+action, but several families overlap heavily: populate_* vs upsert_*_batch vs create_* for the same entities, three separate embedding tools (generate_star_system_embedding, generate_celestial_body_embedding, trigger_bulk_embeddings), and compute_clusters vs create_cluster_snapshot vs create_cluster_report vs generate_deep_synthesis. Descriptions do help differentiate, but an agent has real risk of misselecting within these clusters.
Nearly everything follows snake_case verb_noun (list_/get_/create_/update_/delete_/populate_/generate_), which is predictable. Minor deviations like the bare 'search', 'find_counterparts', and 'compute_clusters' break the strict pattern slightly but remain readable.
51 tools is far beyond a comfortable surface for an agent to navigate. While the domain is broad (CRUD across three entities plus embeddings, clustering, reports, jobs, and settings), many tools are variants of each other (per-entity and bulk embedding/populate variants), pushing this into heavy territory.
The surface covers full lifecycle CRUD for cosmic structures, star systems, and celestial bodies, plus batch upserts, embeddings, clustering/snapshots, report generation, job polling, and settings. It is essentially exhaustive for the stated comparative-astrophysics domain with no obvious dead ends.