Skip to main content
Glama
nathanwbailey

Carbon Tracking MCP

by nathanwbailey
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to Carbon Tracking MCP

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • AI Impact MCP

      anchetadev
      F
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Estimates the environmental footprint of your AI use — energy (kWh), miles driven, water used for cooling, and CO₂ — plus a prompt-efficiency score, working with any AI client by measuring token usage.
      9
      -

    • thirsty-tokens

      evanwang810
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Estimates data-center water consumption from local Claude Code transcripts, providing water usage summaries, breakdowns by model/project, and a compact HTML widget.
      MIT
    • WattScope by WattScope

      WattScopeofficial

      WattScope
      F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      WattScope helps teams see the carbon cost of the AI they are already using. Ask Claude to record a piece of work and it attributes the estimated footprint to your organization and to a project, then reports it back — per session, per project, or organization-wide. Every figure is an estimate, and carries the strength of the evidence behind it.
      -

    • mcp-token-saver

      Talap-creator
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Real-time Claude.ai subscription awareness for AI coding assistants. Surfaces live utilization, forecasts limits, gates expensive operations, and measures real per-task cost.
      5
      17 npm
      6
      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

    B3.4/5.0

    Scored across 2 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    The two tools have clearly distinct scopes: one reports energy/CO2eq for the current Claude Code session, while the other aggregates all sessions in the current project. There is no meaningful overlap in purpose, making selection straightforward.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    Both tools use snake_case, which is consistent. However, one is a noun phrase (current_session_energy) and the other uses a verb+noun pattern (collate_project_sessions_energy), a minor grammatical inconsistency in an otherwise predictable scheme.

    Tool Count3/5

    The server is narrowly scoped, but two tools feels thin for a carbon-tracking surface. It is borderline: enough for a minimal monitor, but likely too few to support broader tracking workflows.

    Completeness3/5

    The tools cover current-session and current-project energy/CO2eq, but notable gaps remain. There is no way to query historical trends, other projects, or account-wide totals, which limits the surface for a carbon-tracking server.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources