Skip to main content
Glama
lfnovo

content-core

by lfnovo
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Related Servers

Alternatives to content-core

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • readable-mcp

      tommypj
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Converts any URL into clean, LLM-ready Markdown, text, or HTML with production-grade features like SSRF protection, rate limiting, retries, caching, and structured error handling.
      MIT

    • FreeCrawl MCP Server

      dylan-gluck
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables web scraping and document processing with JavaScript execution, anti-detection measures, batch processing, and structured data extraction. Supports multiple formats including markdown, HTML, screenshots, and handles PDFs with OCR capabilities.
      4
      MIT

    • rapidapi-metadata-extractor

      JosejuX
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Turns any URL into structured web intelligence in one call: SEO/OpenGraph metadata, public contacts, tech-stack fingerprinting, Schema.org data, a security-headers audit, and clean AI-ready Markdown. Anti-SSRF hardened by design.
      10
      MIT

    • Xberg MCP Server

      jamon8888
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      MCP server that extracts clean text, tables, and structured data from documents, images, code, and audio files, supporting 97 formats with OCR, transcription, and code intelligence.
      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

    A3.7/5.0

    Scored across 2 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    The two tools have clearly distinct purposes—extraction vs. summarization—with no functional overlap. Each tool's parameters are also well-differentiated, avoiding ambiguity.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Both tool names follow the same verb_noun pattern (extract_content, summarize_content), providing a predictable and consistent naming convention.

    Tool Count3/5

    With only 2 tools, the set is borderline thin for a content-processing server. While both are useful, the count is minimal and could be expanded with additional content operations.

    Completeness4/5

    The tools cover the core content workflow of extraction and summarization, but lack other common operations (e.g., translation, keyword extraction) that would round out a comprehensive content toolkit. Minor gaps exist.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessWithin a week

    Resources