Skip to main content
Glama
onurcelep

labgrid-mcp

by onurcelep
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Related Servers

Alternatives to labgrid-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • io-mcp

      bnjenner
      F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables local research workflows (paper discovery, relevance scoring, digests) and homelab monitoring (Prometheus, logs) through an MCP server, using local LLM inference via Ollama with no cloud dependencies.
      -

    • local-llm-mcp

      Qinlupfu
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables MCP clients to scan local GGUF models, estimate VRAM and suggest GPU offload layers, manage llama-server lifecycle, and proxy OpenAI-format chats with idle auto-unload.
      9
      MIT

    • Local AI MCP Servers

      setheerwagen
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Two self-hosted MCP servers: manage a local model machine (Ollama pull/switch, LoRA training) and bridge to local Ollama/vLLM for pure language processing tasks (writing, summarizing, classifying, extraction) without giving the calling agent tools or file access.
      4
      MIT

    • llmstudio-mcp

      dam2452
      F
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      MCP server that connects LLM agents to a local LM Studio instance, enabling model management, OpenAI-compatible chat completions, text completions, and embeddings through a set of tools.
      9
      1
      -
    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 38 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Most tools have distinct purposes (e.g., get_power_state vs set_power, console_open vs console_read). A few pairs like release_place/release_from and who/list_places could be confused, but their descriptions clearly differentiate them. Overall boundaries are clear.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    The vast majority of tool names follow a verb_noun pattern (list_places, reserve, acquire_place, set_power). Exceptions like coordinator_info and who break the pattern, but they are minor and the naming is otherwise predictable.

    Tool Count2/5

    38 tools is well above the 25-tool threshold, making the surface feel heavy. While the domain is broad, the high count may overwhelm agents, and some tools could be consolidated (e.g., a single console tool with subcommands). The scope justifies some breadth, but this exceeds reasonable limits.

    Completeness4/5

    The tool set covers core lifecycle operations: place inspection, reservation management, acquisition/release, hardware control (power/IO/SD/USB), console, SSH, file transfer, and port forwarding. Minor gaps include no delete_place, no get_reservation by token, and no explicit listing of console sessions, but these are workable shortcomings.

    Maintenance

    ActivitySlowing
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources