Skip to main content
Glama
robertocruzesparza-dev

powerbi-desktop-mcp

by robertocruzesparza-dev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to powerbi-desktop-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • Power BI MCP Server

      sulaiman013
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables AI assistants to interact with Power BI datasets through natural language, allowing users to query data, generate DAX, and get insights without leaving their AI assistant.
      124
      MIT

    • powerbi-fullstack-mcp

      TbsS7
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables an AI assistant to build Power BI projects end to end: data modeling (tables, DAX measures, relationships, calculation groups, roles, field parameters) against an open Power BI Desktop via TOM/XMLA, and reports (pages, visuals, formatting, bookmarks, themes) as PBIR files in a .pbip project. Every visual is cross-checked against the real model before being written, so generated dashboards don't break on open.
      MIT

    • Microsoft Fabric MCP Server

      snahrup
      A
      license
      B
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables AI assistants to interact with Microsoft Fabric and Power BI services through the Model Context Protocol. Users can manage workspaces, execute DAX queries, refresh datasets, and create Fabric notebooks using natural language.
      6
      10 npm
      2
      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

    A3.5/5.0

    Scored across 33 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Tools are largely distinct and deliberately layered: `audit_dashboard` is a documented orchestrator that points to detail tools, and `analyze_relationships` explicitly says to use it over `list_relationships` for design review. A few boundaries remain fuzzy — `list_data_sources` vs `classify_connections`, `get_model_summary` vs the individual `list_*` calls, and the cluster of Power Query tools (`diagnose_power_query`, `analyze_folding_risk`, `find_query_diagnostics`, `read_mashup_traces`, `list_power_query`) — but the descriptions do most of the disambiguating work.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Every name is snake_case, verb-first, and noun-scoped (list_tables, analyze_model_size, check_relationship_integrity, propose_change). Verb choice varies (list/get/find/analyze/check/audit/read/profile/compare/run) but semantically rather than arbitrarily, so the pattern stays predictable. The propose_change/finish_change pair reads as an intentional two-step workflow rather than a naming break.

    Tool Count3/5

    33 tools is heavy for an agent to navigate, even though each one maps to a real, non-duplicated audit or inspection task. The audit_dashboard aggregator and clear START HERE guidance offset some of the load, but the surface is well past the comfortable 3-15 range for a single server.

    Completeness4/5

    Coverage is unusually broad: model metadata, DAX, Power Query/M, folding, RLS, data sources, runtime traces, offline report layout, file scanning, diffing, profiling, and a guarded propose/apply/rollback edit flow. Gaps are mostly acknowledged hard limits — the compressed DataModel/DataMashup in .pbix is never read or edited (so in-place .pbix measure edits are impossible), and the server cannot trigger refreshes or start/stop Query Diagnostics.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources