Skip to main content
Glama
nakasyou

twitter_api_safe_relay_mcp

by nakasyou

Related Servers

Alternatives to twitter_api_safe_relay_mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Exposes provider-specific tools and relays HTTP requests to configured providers like Supabase, Vercel, and Context7, enabling interaction with multiple external APIs through a unified MCP interface with configurable authentication and access controls.
      -
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to safely interact with external services (HTTP, GraphQL, gRPC, Bash, SQL) using HCL templates and OS keychain secrets, preventing prompt injection by keeping request details from the LLM.
      113
      Apache 2.0
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Provides internal LLM services with a single MCP endpoint that routes requests to roughly 50 per-app MCP servers (such as ADO and Oracle), applying identity, redaction, authorization, and audit on that hop using a static YAML registry of downstream URLs.
      -
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables LLMs to make HTTP requests with OAuth2, session cookies, retry logic, and cURL command generation, while providing security features like SSRF protection and TLS enforcement.
      1
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables LLMs to make arbitrary HTTP API requests with any method and full control over headers, query parameters, and body.
      7 npm
      ISC
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables you to publish remote MCP tools from your own Lambda behind a single HTTP API endpoint, with selectable authorization (IAM, API key, JWT, Lambda, or Google Workspace), stage throttling, JSON access logs, and RFC 9728 resource metadata discovery. No session table or sticky routing is needed, so any invocation can answer any request.
      36 npm
      MIT

    TDQS

    A4.1/5.0

    Scored across 2 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    The two tools have completely distinct purposes: one fetches/curates request templates from the catalog, the other executes a single request against the relay. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them.

    Naming Consistency3/5

    Both tools use a similar 'twitter_' prefix, but one uses 'request' and the other 'request_catalog', which is a mild inconsistency in granularity. The names are readable but the pattern isn't perfectly parallel—'twitter_api_request' vs 'twitter_request_catalog' mixes the placement of 'api' and 'request'.

    Tool Count2/5

    Two tools feels extremely thin for a Twitter/X API surface, which is vast (timelines, tweets, users, friendships, DMs, media, trends). While the catalog tool cleverly bundles the numerous request types into a searchable interface, the overall surface is still very limited given the breadth of the domain.

    Completeness3/5

    The two-tool design is a clever pattern: the catalog surfaces templates for any operation and the executor handles them, so in principle the coverage is as deep as the catalog. However, there are no helper tools for authentication setup, session management, or error diagnosis, and the design forces agents to do two calls for every single operation, creating friction.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessNo issues