Skip to main content
Glama
rhyne1012

avl-mcp

by rhyne1012
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to avl-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • Groundline

      fhs1220888
      A
      license
      B
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables any MCP client to plan and run verifiable analysis of engine hot-fire and bench test data through tools that open runs, segment phases, check sensor health, redlines, valve response and oscillations, compare simulations, verify every reported number against an evidence ledger, and write HTML reports. All findings stay traceable and reproducible from deterministic tool calls rather than raw samples.
      5
      510 PyPI
      MIT

    • OpenVSP MCP (Maintained Fork)

      rhyne1012
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Maintained fork of Three-Little-Birds/openvsp-mcp, adding OpenVSP geometry inspection, typed parameter editing, SVG/STL previews, validated VSPAERO analysis, and durable parallel batches with progress, cancellation, resume, and CSV/JSON export. Independently maintained by rhyne1012; not an official OpenVSP or NASA project.
      16
      MIT

    • tigl-mcp

      cmudrc
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Provides MCP tools for CPACS-oriented TiGL workflows, enabling lifecycle management, inspection, export, and parameter manipulation of aircraft geometry models without native geometry runtimes.
      3
      MIT

    • su2-mcp

      cmudrc
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables interaction with SU2 CFD solver for session lifecycle management, config editing, solver execution, and results inspection, with optional CPACS integration for aircraft analysis.
      4
      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

    A3.9/5.0

    Scored across 11 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, but the execution-related tools avl.run, avl.sweep, and avl.submit overlap in that all run AVL cases with different execution models. Descriptions clarify the boundaries (single condition vs. many conditions vs. detached background job), so an agent can disambiguate after reading carefully.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tools follow a highly predictable avl.<action> pattern with lowercase single words and no mixed conventions. The only minor inconsistency is that some actions are verbs (run, validate, inspect) and others are nouns (health, status, results), but this is negligible and does not impair selection.

    Tool Count5/5

    The server exposes 11 tools, which is well within the recommended 3-15 range and appropriate for an AVL analysis domain. The background job lifecycle tools (submit, status, cancel, resume) earn their place because AVL runs can be long-lived and need detached execution support.

    Completeness4/5

    The surface covers validation, inspection, single-run execution, trim, sweeps, background job management, results retrieval, and health checks, which is a strong lifecycle for running AVL analyses. Minor gaps exist, such as no explicit tool to list all background jobs or to modify/author geometry, but agents can work around these by managing jobs individually and relying on external file editing.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources