Skip to main content
Glama
regismesquita

A2A MCP Server

by regismesquita
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Related Servers

Alternatives to A2A MCP Server

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • cc-tap

      es617
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      An MCP server that bridges Claude Desktop and Claude Code by letting Desktop read and interact with Claude Code Remote Control sessions, enabling cross-agent coordination.
      6
      3
      MIT

    • IT Asset Tracker MCP Server

      mahi-bhardwaj
      F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      An MCP server that connects Claude Desktop to the IT Asset Tracker backend, giving Claude access to 70+ tools for managing assets, users, requests, and reports.
      -

    • RLM Knowledge Base

      cgaeking
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      An MCP server that enables Claude Desktop to search and read local documents via full-text and fuzzy search, providing direct access to indexed files without chunking.
      MIT
    Deploy Server
    RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

    TDQS

    B3.2/5.0

    Scored across 3 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose with no overlap: a2a_server_registry manages server URLs, call_agent invokes a specific agent, and list_agents retrieves agent information. The descriptions clearly differentiate between server management, agent invocation, and agent listing functions.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    The tools follow a consistent snake_case naming convention throughout. However, the naming pattern is mixed: a2a_server_registry uses a prefix+noun+noun structure, while call_agent and list_agents use verb+noun. This minor deviation prevents a perfect score.

    Tool Count3/5

    With only 3 tools, the server feels somewhat thin for an A2A (Agent-to-Agent) server that presumably facilitates multi-agent interactions. While the tools cover basic operations (registry management, agent calling, and listing), the scope suggests more functionality could be expected, such as agent configuration or monitoring tools.

    Completeness3/5

    The tools provide core operations for server registration and agent interaction, but there are notable gaps. For example, there's no way to update server details, manage agent states beyond listing, or handle error scenarios explicitly. The surface covers basic workflows but lacks comprehensive lifecycle management for the domain.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources