Skip to main content
Glama
muend

arcgis-mcp-bridge

by muend
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to arcgis-mcp-bridge

Related Servers

  • arcgis-pro-mcp-free

    IngKevinDavid
    A
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    A
    maintenance
    Enables MCP-capable assistants to control an open ArcGIS Pro project locally over TCP 127.0.0.1, with 68 commands and 167 tools for layers, editing, symbology, layouts, geoprocessing, and arcpy execution.
    1
    MIT

  • CLI-Anything · ArcGIS Pro

    Jasper0122
    A
    license
    A
    quality
    C
    maintenance
    Drive Esri's ArcGIS Pro from an AI agent — the ArcGIS Pro counterpart to QGIS MCP. A headless ArcPy CLI plus an in-process .NET 8 add-in that exposes the live Pro session as MCP tools (ping, zoom_to, query, run_gp, export_layout) so an agent drives the running project while you watch.
    6
    67
    PolyForm Noncommercial 1.0.0

  • arcmap-10-8-mcp

    Stella8758
    F
    license
    B
    quality
    C
    maintenance
    Enables safe local MCP-based control of ArcMap Desktop 10.8, allowing read-only inspection of map documents, layers, datasets, and execution of allowlisted geoprocessing tools through ArcPy.
    15
    3
    -

  • mcp-server

    Ezzeay
    A
    license
    B
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    Production-ready TypeScript MCP server exposing utility, GitHub, and Microsoft Teams tools over stdio.
    14
    1
    MIT

  • ArcGIS Pro MCP

    652036
    A
    license
    C
    quality
    B
    maintenance
    It enables MCP clients to execute ArcPy-based GIS workflows within configured permission and path boundaries, manage projects, maps, layers, layouts, data, spatial analysis, networks, and publishing. It can also attach to a live ArcGIS Pro session when explicitly requested, while failing closed for unauthorized or unintended operations.
    458
    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

A3.5/5.0

Scored across 103 tools

Disambiguation3/5

Most tools map cleanly to distinct ArcPy operations, but several near-neighbor pairs exist (list_layers/list_layers_in_map, zonal_statistics/zonal_statistics_as_table, get_extent/describe_dataset) that could lead to misselection. The descriptions are generally strong enough to disambiguate with careful reading, but the sheer number of metadata, QA, and overlay tools creates boundary overlap.

Naming Consistency4/5

The set overwhelmingly follows a clear snake_case verb_noun convention (create_feature_class, delete_field, project_raster, intersect_features). A few noun-style analysis names (service_area, hotspot_analysis, od_cost_matrix, raster_calculator) and converter names (feature_to_csv, excel_to_table) break the pattern slightly, but the naming remains predictable.

Tool Count1/5

103 tools is an extreme surface for a single MCP server, far past the 50+ threshold. Even if each ArcPy wrapper is individually useful, an agent would face severe selection overhead and prompt/context burden; a focused server split by domain would be more coherent.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface spans geodatabase management, vectors, rasters, network analysis, spatial statistics, and map/layout automation, covering most common GIS workflows end to end. Gaps include row-level feature editing/update/delete, a table join field operation, and dedicated buffer/clip tools (currently hidden inside execute_spatial_tool), but these are workable rather than fatal.

Maintenance

ActivityActive
ResponsivenessResponsive

Resources