Skip to main content
Glama
mfbaig35r

procurement-graph

by mfbaig35r
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to procurement-graph

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • WorkGraph

      AlexWangzhixin
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables MCP clients to query a local drill-down work map and knowledge graph, supporting work map, project context, related projects, reuse finding, search, and graph statistics, all read-only.
      Apache 2.0

    • code-graph

      osadan
      F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables querying cross-repo code dependencies, HTTP routes, database tables, and queues via an MCP server using Cypher queries.
      -

    • redraft

      KaelinGraf
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      An MCP server for AI-assisted project development and tracking. It exposes a typed graph of design nodes (concepts, decisions, requirements, etc.) and edges to Claude Code, enabling structured management of project knowledge and report generation.
      3
      Apache 2.0
    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

    A3.9/5.0

    Scored across 16 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool targets a distinct concept or action: ordering, feasibility, analysis details, artifact examples, deliverables, dependencies, etc. The descriptions clearly differentiate them, and there is no overlap in purpose.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tool names follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern (e.g., build_order, list_analyses, get_dependencies). The exceptions like feasible_now and data_gap_analysis still align with adjective_noun, maintaining overall consistency.

    Tool Count5/5

    The 16 tools cover the full range of operations expected for a procurement knowledge graph: listing, getting details, dependency analysis, feasibility checks, and phase browsing. Neither too few nor too many for the domain.

    Completeness5/5

    The tool surface provides comprehensive coverage for a read-only catalog: listing all node types, fetching full specs, exploring dependencies both upstream and downstream, ordering builds, and assessing feasibility. No obvious gaps for the stated purpose.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources