Skip to main content
Glama
enesjakozh
misterboe

Strapi MCP Server

by misterboe
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
JavaScript
Remote

Strapi MCP Server

A Model Context Protocol server for interacting with Strapi CMS. This server enables AI assistants to interact with your Strapi instance through a standardized interface, supporting content types and REST API operations.

⚠️ IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER: This software has been developed with the assistance of AI technology. It is provided as-is and should NOT be used in production environments without thorough testing and validation. The code may contain errors, security vulnerabilities, or unexpected behavior. Use at your own risk for research, learning, or development purposes only.

Changelog

Version 2.6.0 - Enhanced Validation & Debugging Update

  • 🔧 Implemented structured error handling with McpError and ErrorCode

  • ✅ Added comprehensive Zod validation for runtime type safety

  • 📊 Integrated comprehensive logging system with request tracking

  • 🐛 Added debug mode configuration with environment variables

  • 🧹 Removed unused prompt handlers for cleaner codebase

  • ⬆️ Updated all dependencies to latest versions

  • 📖 Added DEBUGGING.md guide for development workflow

  • 🛡️ Enhanced security with better input validation

  • 🚀 Improved developer experience with detailed error messages

For complete version history, see CHANGELOG.md.

Related MCP server: Directus MCP Server

Features

  • 🔍 Schema introspection

  • 🔄 REST API support with validation

  • 📸 Media upload handling

  • 🔐 JWT authentication

  • 📝 Content type management

  • 🖼️ Image processing with format conversion

  • 🌐 Multiple server support

  • ✅ Automatic schema validation

  • 🔒 Write protection policy

  • 📚 Integrated documentation

  • 🔄 Version compatibility management

Installation

You can use this server directly with npx in your Claude Desktop configuration:

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "strapi": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "@bschauer/strapi-mcp-server@2.6.0"]
    }
  }
}

Configuration

Create a configuration file at ~/.mcp/strapi-mcp-server.config.json:

{
  "myserver": {
    "api_url": "http://localhost:1337",
    "api_key": "your-jwt-token-from-strapi-admin",
    "version": "5.*" // Optional: Specify Strapi version (e.g., "5.*", "4.1.5", "v4")
  }
}

You can configure multiple Strapi instances by adding them to this file.

Version Configuration

The server now supports various version formats:

  • Wildcard: "5.", "4."

  • Specific: "4.1.5", "5.0.0"

  • Simple: "v4", "v5"

This helps the server provide version-specific guidance and handle API differences appropriately.

Getting a JWT Token

  1. Log in to your Strapi admin panel

  2. Create an API token with appropriate permissions

  3. Add the token to your config file under the appropriate server name

Usage

List Available Servers

strapi_list_servers();
// Now includes version information and differences between v4 and v5

Content Types

// Get all content types from a specific server
strapi_get_content_types({
  server: "myserver",
});

// Get components with pagination
strapi_get_components({
  server: "myserver",
  page: 1,
  pageSize: 25,
});

REST API

The REST API provides comprehensive CRUD operations with built-in validation and version-specific handling:

// Query content with filters
strapi_rest({
  server: "myserver",
  endpoint: "api/articles",
  method: "GET",
  params: {
    filters: {
      title: {
        $contains: "search term",
      },
    },
  },
});

// Create new content
strapi_rest({
  server: "myserver",
  endpoint: "api/articles",
  method: "POST",
  body: {
    data: {
      title: "New Article",
      content: "Article content",
      category: "news",
    },
  },
});

// Update content
strapi_rest({
  server: "myserver",
  endpoint: "api/articles/123",
  method: "PUT",
  body: {
    data: {
      title: "Updated Title",
      content: "Updated content",
    },
  },
});

// Delete content
strapi_rest({
  server: "myserver",
  endpoint: "api/articles/123",
  method: "DELETE",
});

Media Upload

// Upload image with automatic optimization
strapi_upload_media({
  server: "myserver",
  url: "https://example.com/image.jpg",
  format: "webp",
  quality: 80,
  metadata: {
    name: "My Image",
    caption: "Image Caption",
    alternativeText: "Alt Text",
  },
});

Version Differences (v4 vs v5)

Key differences between Strapi versions that the server handles automatically:

v4

  • Uses numeric IDs

  • Nested attribute structure

  • Data wrapper in responses

  • Traditional REST patterns

  • External i18n plugin

v5

  • Document-based IDs

  • Flat data structure

  • Direct attribute access

  • Enhanced JWT security

  • Integrated i18n support

  • New Document Service API

Security Features

Write Protection Policy

The server implements a strict write protection policy:

  • All write operations require explicit authorization

  • Protected operations include:

    • POST (Create)

    • PUT (Update)

    • DELETE

    • Media Upload

  • Each operation is logged and validated

Best Practices

  1. Always check schema first with strapi_get_content_types

  2. Use proper plural/singular forms for endpoints

  3. Include error handling in your queries

  4. Validate URLs before upload

  5. Start with minimal queries and add population only when needed

  6. Always include the complete data object when updating

  7. Use filters to optimize query performance

  8. Leverage built-in schema validation

  9. Check version compatibility for your operations

  10. Follow the write protection policy guidelines

REST API Tips

Filtering

// Filter by field value
params: {
  filters: {
    title: "Exact Match";
  }
}

// Contains filter
params: {
  filters: {
    title: {
      $contains: "partial";
    }
  }
}

// Multiple conditions
params: {
  filters: {
    $and: [{ category: "news" }, { published: true }];
  }
}

Sorting

params: {
  sort: ["createdAt:desc"];
}

Pagination

params: {
  pagination: {
    page: 1,
    pageSize: 25
  }
}

Population

// Basic request without population
params: {
}

// Selective population when needed
params: {
  populate: ["category"];
}

// Detailed population with field selection
params: {
  populate: {
    category: {
      fields: ["name", "slug"];
    }
  }
}

Troubleshooting

Common issues and solutions:

  1. 404 Errors

    • Check endpoint plural/singular form

    • Verify content type exists

    • Ensure correct API URL

    • Check if using correct ID format (numeric vs document-based)

  2. Authentication Issues

    • Verify JWT token is valid

    • Check token permissions

    • Ensure token hasn't expired

  3. Version-Related Issues

    • Verify version specification in config

    • Check data structure matches version

    • Review version differences documentation

  4. Write Protection Errors

    • Ensure operation is authorized

    • Check if operation is protected

    • Verify request follows security policy

Contributing

Contributions are welcome! Please feel free to submit a Pull Request.

License

MIT

Available Tools

5 tools
strapi_get_componentsA

Get all components from Strapi with pagination support. Returns both component data and pagination metadata (page, pageSize, total, pageCount).

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
serverYesThe name of the server to connect to
pageNoPage number (starts at 1)
pageSizeNoNumber of items per page

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It mentions pagination support and return format (component data + metadata), but does not explicitly state read-only nature, error handling, or rate limits. The added detail is useful but incomplete.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences: the first states the core function, the second details the output. Every word is purposeful, no redundancy. Front-loaded with the most important information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description outlines the returned data types but lacks detail on component structure, error responses, or pagination field semantics. It is adequate but not thorough.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Input schema covers all 3 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's own descriptions; it only reiterates pagination in broad terms.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Get all components from Strapi') and includes pagination support, distinguishing it from siblings like 'get_content_types' by resource type. It is specific and unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., strapi_get_content_types, strapi_rest). There is no mention of prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

strapi_get_content_typesB

Get all content types from Strapi. Returns the complete schema of all content types.

Initialization Steps (ALWAYS DO FIRST)

  1. Get schema and analyze with this tool

  2. Capture Content Types and structures

  3. Remember endpoint names (pluralName/singularName)

  4. Document fields and types

  5. Identify relations

  6. Consider required fields and validations

Schema Conventions

  • singularName: Used for single item queries (e.g., "article")

  • pluralName: Used for collection endpoints (e.g., "articles")

  • collectionName: Database collection name

Endpoint Patterns

  • Collection: GET /api/{pluralName}

  • Single: GET /api/{pluralName}/{id}

  • Create: POST /api/{pluralName}

  • Update: PUT /api/{pluralName}/{id}

  • Delete: DELETE /api/{pluralName}/{id}

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
serverYesThe name of the server to connect to

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states a read operation but lacks details on side effects, auth needs, rate limits, or error behavior. The extra conventions section does not describe this tool's behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is verbose and includes extensive redundant material (initialization steps, schema conventions, endpoint patterns) that are not specific to this tool. Not every sentence earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple list tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description states the return value (complete schema) but lacks details on format, pagination, or errors. The extra context about Strapi conventions is helpful but not necessary.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema already provides a clear description for the single 'server' parameter. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description explicitly states 'Get all content types from Strapi. Returns the complete schema of all content types,' providing a clear verb+resource combination. It naturally distinguishes from siblings like strapi_get_components and strapi_rest.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The 'Initialization Steps' implies this tool should be used first, but no explicit guidance on when not to use it or comparisons with sibling tools. Alternatives are not named.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

strapi_list_serversC

List all available Strapi servers from the configuration.

Security Policy

STRICT_USER_AUTHORIZATION_REQUIRED: No write operations without explicit user authorization. Protected operations: POST (Create), PUT (Update), DELETE (Delete), Media Upload. All write operations require userAuthorized: true parameter.

Strapi Version Support

Supports both Strapi v4 and v5 with automatic version detection.

Version Differences

  • v4: Numeric IDs, nested attributes under 'attributes', data wrapper in responses

  • v5: Document-based IDs (documentId), flat structure, direct attribute access

Common Errors

  • 404: Using numeric ID instead of documentId, wrong plural/singular form

  • 405: Incorrect endpoint (/article instead of /articles)

  • 400: Missing data wrapper in request body

Best Practices

  1. Always check schema first with strapi_get_content_types

  2. Use documentId (not numeric id) for Strapi v5

  3. Always use data wrapper for updates: { data: { field: value } }

  4. Use pluralName for collection endpoints (api/articles)

  5. Validate URLs with webtools before using them

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No parameters

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It states the tool lists servers (read-only), but includes a security policy about write operations that is irrelevant to this tool. It does not describe the output format or any side effects, leaving behavioral gaps.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description starts with a clear purpose sentence but then includes a large block of general Strapi documentation (security policy, version differences, errors, best practices) that is not directly relevant to listing servers. This reduces conciseness and adds noise.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description is incomplete for a tool with no output schema. It does not state what the returned list contains (e.g., server names, URLs). The contextual extras about version support and errors are not specific to this tool, leaving essential information missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 0 parameters, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description omits parameter details, which is appropriate given the schema. Baseline 4 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The first sentence clearly states the tool's action and resource: 'List all available Strapi servers from the configuration.' This is specific and distinct from sibling tools, but the description does not explicitly differentiate it from siblings like strapi_get_content_types or strapi_rest.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description includes best practices and common errors for Strapi in general, but does not tell the agent when listing servers is appropriate or when to use sibling tools instead.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

strapi_restA

Execute REST API requests against Strapi endpoints. IMPORTANT: All write operations (POST, PUT, DELETE) require explicit user authorization via the userAuthorized parameter.

Reading Data

params: { populate: ['SEO'] } // Populate a component params: { populate: { SEO: { fields: ['Title', 'seoDescription'] } } } // With field selection params: { filters: { title: { $contains: 'search' } } } // Filter results params: { sort: ['createdAt:desc'] } // Sort results params: { pagination: { page: 1, pageSize: 10 } } // Pagination

Writing Data (REQUIRES userAuthorized: true)

body: { data: { componentName: { Title: 'value' }, // Single component componentName: [{ field: 'value' }] // Repeatable component } }

Debugging Guide

  • 404 Error: Check plural/singular form, use documentId not numeric id

  • 400 Error: Check if data wrapper is present in body

  • 405 Error: Check endpoint format (/articles not /article)

  • URL Errors: Validate URLs with webtools first

  • ID Problems: Use documentId for Strapi v5

Strapi v5 Specifics

  • Use documentId instead of numeric id

  • Direct attribute access (no nested attributes)

  • No data wrapper in GET responses

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
serverYesThe name of the server to connect to
endpointYesThe API endpoint (e.g., 'api/articles')
methodNoHTTP method to useGET
paramsNoOptional query parameters for GET requests. For components, use populate: ['componentName'] or populate: { componentName: { fields: ['field1'] } }
bodyNoRequest body for POST/PUT requests. For components, use: { data: { componentName: { field: 'value' } } } for single components or { data: { componentName: [{ field: 'value' }] } } for repeatable components
userAuthorizedNoREQUIRED for POST/PUT/DELETE operations. Client MUST obtain explicit user authorization before setting this to true.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that write operations require authorization, and gives error handling tips. It does not explicitly state destructive nature or rate limits, but the authorization requirement implies mutability for writes.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with the critical authorization note and well-organized into sections (Reading Data, Writing Data, Debugging Guide, Strapi v5 Specifics). While comprehensive, it is slightly verbose but every section is informative and earned.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema, the description focuses on input and common errors but does not explain what the tool returns (the API response object). It covers usage scenarios well, but for a tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, a brief mention of the return format would improve completeness.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, but the description adds significant value by providing concrete examples for params (populate, filters, sort, pagination) and body (single and repeatable components). It also explains the userAuthorized parameter in detail, including the need for explicit user authorization.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states 'Execute REST API requests against Strapi endpoints', specifying the verb (execute) and resource (REST API requests to Strapi). It is distinct from sibling tools which handle components, content types, servers, and media uploads.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly says write operations (POST, PUT, DELETE) require userAuthorized: true, and provides detailed examples for reading and writing. Also includes a debugging guide and Strapi v5 specifics, helping the agent decide when and how to use this tool versus alternatives.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

strapi_upload_mediaA

Upload media to Strapi's media library from a URL with format conversion, quality control, and metadata options. IMPORTANT: This is a write operation that REQUIRES explicit user authorization via the userAuthorized parameter.

Upload Steps

  1. Upload via strapi_upload_media with URL and metadata

  2. Get image ID from response

  3. Link to content using strapi_rest PUT request

Linking Images to Content (Strapi v5)

After upload, use PUT request to link: { "method": "PUT", "endpoint": "api/articles/{documentId}", "body": { "data": { "images": ["imageId"] } }, "userAuthorized": true }

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
serverYesThe name of the server to connect to
urlYesURL of the image to upload
formatNoTarget format for the image. Use 'original' to keep the source format.original
qualityNoImage quality (1-100). Only applies when converting formats.
metadataNo
userAuthorizedNoREQUIRED for media upload operations. Client MUST obtain explicit user authorization before setting this to true.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It correctly identifies the tool as a write operation and highlights the authorization requirement. However, it does not disclose what happens if authorization is not provided, the response structure, or any side effects beyond the immediate upload.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is relatively concise, front-loading the main purpose and important authorization note. The subsequent steps and linking example are helpful but add length. Overall, it is well-structured and readable.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (6 parameters, nested objects, no output schema), the description provides essential context: the upload workflow, linking steps, and authorization requirement. It lacks a description of the return value but compensates with procedural guidance.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema already covers 83% of parameters with descriptions. The description adds minimal new meaning beyond restating the schema's purpose and emphasizing the 'userAuthorized' requirement. Given high schema coverage, a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool uploads media to Strapi's media library from a URL, with format conversion, quality control, and metadata options. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools (which are get/list/rest operations) as the dedicated upload/write tool.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description emphasizes that this is a write operation requiring user authorization via the 'userAuthorized' parameter. It also provides upload steps and linking instructions, guiding the agent on how to use the tool in a workflow. However, it does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives or when not to use.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct function: schema introspection (components vs content types), server listing, generic REST execution, and media upload. No overlap in purposes.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tools follow a strapi_verb_noun pattern mostly (get_components, get_content_types, list_servers, upload_media), but 'strapi_rest' deviates by using an acronym instead of a verb. Overall consistent.

Tool Count5/5

5 tools is well-scoped for a Strapi MCP server, covering schema discovery, generic API access, media upload, and server management without superfluous tools.

Completeness4/5

The tool set provides schema introspection and a generic REST tool for all CRUD operations, plus media upload. Minor gap: no dedicated tool for content entry listing, but the REST tool covers it with schema guidance.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessSyncing

Resources

Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.

Looking for Admin?

If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.

Related MCP Connectors

  • hithereiamaliff-mcp-nextcloudOAuth
    ai.smithery

    A comprehensive Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that enables AI assistants to interact with yo…

    Cloud StorageFile SystemsWorkplace & Productivity
    237
  • mcpCOAuth
    com.wix

    A Model Context Protocol server for Wix AI tools

    Developer ToolsContent Management SystemsApp Automation
    216
  • Apideck MCPA
    dev.apideck.mcp

    Model Context Protocol server for the Apideck Unified API. Connect any MCP-compatible agent framework to 100+ accounting systems, HRIS platforms, file storage providers, and more through one integration. More information https://www.apideck.com/mcp-server

    Developer Tools
    42
  • TelnyxA
    com.telnyx.api

    The Telnyx MCP server is an official implementation of the Model Context Protocol that enables AI clients (like Claude Desktop, Cursor, and OpenAI Agents) to interact with Telnyx's telephony, messaging, and AI assistant APIs. It provides comprehensive capabilities including making and managing phone calls, sending SMS/MMS messages, purchasing and configuring phone numbers, creating AI assistants with custom instructions, managing cloud storage buckets, scraping and embedding website content, and handling integration secrets. The server exists as both a local implementation and a remotely hosted version, allowing developers to integrate real-world communication infrastructure directly into AI applications.

    CommunicationCloud PlatformsCloud Storage
    62

Related MCP Servers

Appeared in Searches

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/misterboe/strapi-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server