Skip to main content
Glama
msuresh007

nacha-mcp

by msuresh007

Related Servers

Alternatives to nacha-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • F
      license
      B
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables local inspection of synthetic ACH files by parsing fixed-width records, validating structure and control totals, explaining findings, masking sensitive fields, repairing derived controls, and generating deterministic test files. All work happens on-device with no bank or network transmission.
      10
      -
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables AI assistants to parse, validate, summarize, and convert X12 EDI documents (such as 850 purchase orders and 810 invoices) into structured JSON through callable MCP tools.
      -
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      MCP server that validates and writes DATEV-Format (EXTF) files: Buchungsstapel (booking batches) and Debitoren/Kreditoren (customer and supplier master data). Ask your AI assistant why DATEV rejected an import, or have it turn a list of bookings into a file DATEV accepts.
      2
      4
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Let AI agents read, validate and acknowledge EDI documents. Parses raw X12 and EDIFACT interchanges into structured JSON, validates envelope integrity, produces plain-language summaries, and generates 997 Functional Acknowledgments.
      4
      MIT
    • F
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      MCP server for ISO 20022 acmt.001 Account Opening (and companion acmt.* messages): message-type discovery, required-field lookup, JSON Schema introspection, IBAN/BIC/LEI validation, flat-record validation, and validated acmt XML generation.
      6
      56 PyPI
      1
      -

    TDQS

    A4.2/5.0

    Scored across 2 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    The two tools have clearly different outputs—one returns the full parsed structure and one returns a condensed summary—so an agent can pick based on response size. There is mild overlap because both parse the file, but the naming and descriptions sufficiently differentiate their purposes.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Both tool names follow the same verb_noun_file pattern: parse_nacha_file and summarize_nacha_file. The naming is predictable, consistent, and accurately reflects the intent of each tool.

    Tool Count4/5

    With only two tools, the server is intentionally narrow, but both tools serve a clear and distinct purpose for NACHA file handling. The count is slightly thin but not inappropriate given the focused read-only scope.

    Completeness4/5

    For a server focused on reading and validating NACHA files, the surface covers the essential workflows: full detailed parsing and condensed summarization. It could benefit from additional capabilities like file creation or export, but those seem outside its apparent scope.

    Maintenance

    ActivitySlowing
    ResponsivenessNo issues