erddap-mcp-demo
Related Servers
Alternatives to erddap-mcp-demo
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceAccess oceanographic and environmental data from 63+ ERDDAP servers worldwide through natural language queries. Search datasets, retrieve metadata, and download scientific data for climate research, marine biology, and coastal management.18-
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables LLMs to work with Copernicus Marine ocean data through semantic tools for dataset discovery, metadata retrieval, recommendation, validation, point time-series extraction, area statistics, subsetting, and computation without exposing raw API plumbing.-

Oceanum MCPofficial
AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables AI assistants to search, query, and manage ocean/environmental datasets from the Oceanum platform, and to read, write, and delete files in Oceanum cloud storage.1MIT- AlicenseBqualityBmaintenanceEnables natural language querying of oceanographic data from the NES-LTER API, including CTD profiles, cruise datasets, and station information.10MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceEnables natural language search and discovery of open-access scientific datasets through the EOSC Data Commons OpenSearch service. Provides tools to search datasets and retrieve file metadata using LLM-assisted queries.14MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceExposes data.world's catalog, glossary, lineage, and SQL/SPARQL query APIs to LLM agents, enabling natural language interaction with enterprise data assets.-
TDQS
Scored across 5 tools
There is significant overlap: 'list_datasets' and 'search_datasets' have identical descriptions and appear to serve the same purpose, making it hard for an agent to distinguish them. Other tools are distinct but the duplication is a major issue.
Names follow a verb_noun pattern with underscores, but there is inconsistency in verb choice: 'list_datasets' vs 'search_datasets' for the same action, and 'get_' vs 'list_' across similar operations. While readable, the pattern is not fully consistent.
5 tools is within the well-scoped range for an ERDDAP server. However, the duplication reduces effective distinct tools to 4, making the count slightly less efficient but still acceptable.
The set covers listing datasets, listing variables, and retrieving data, but lacks tools for dataset metadata (e.g., attributes, time ranges) or data export formats. Basic querying is possible, but notable gaps exist.