Skip to main content
Glama
megaease

MegaCloud MCP Server

Official
by megaease

Related Servers

Alternatives to MegaCloud MCP Server

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables MCP-capable agents to manage Meshive GPU Cloud resources, including account, workspaces, pods, storage, GPUs, templates, serverless deployments, tasks, assets, machines, and billing history.
      Apache 2.0
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables MCP clients to manage a Remnawave panel through its full API, covering users, nodes, hosts, subscriptions, and more with configurable tool profiles and read/write token access.
      17 npm
      MIT
    • F
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables managing and monitoring MSP360's Managed Backup Service, covering companies, computers, backup plans, monitoring, and licenses.
      14
      -
    • F
      license
      B
      quality
      Not graded
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to administer MetaMCP instances by managing servers, namespaces, endpoints, and API keys across multiple deployments. Supports full CRUD operations, bulk server imports, cross-instance cloning, and granular tool management through MetaMCP's tRPC API.
      26
      1
      -

    TDQS

    C2.8/5.0

    Scored across 35 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Each tool targets a specific resource or metric, with no obvious overlaps. However, the high granularity (e.g., separate tools for each host metric) could lead to selection errors if an agent misidentifies the exact tool needed.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tool names use a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., list_host_cpu_monitor_data, create_single_redis_middleware). Naming is predictable and follows the same convention throughout.

    Tool Count2/5

    With 35 tools, the server is overly granular. Many host monitor data tools could be parameterized into fewer tools. The count feels heavy for the apparent scope of middleware management and host monitoring.

    Completeness4/5

    The tool surface covers CRUD for middleware instances, alert rules, and comprehensive host monitoring. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no tool to update middleware configuration), but core workflows are well-covered.