Skip to main content
Glama
tiancaijb

ReplyFlow MCP Server

by tiancaijb
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to ReplyFlow MCP Server

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • ShipPost MCP

      RyanKramer
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to read, post, search, and engage with Twitter/X content, including AI-powered reply drafting and analytics.
      17
      MIT

    • TwitterAPI.io MCP Server

      DevRico003
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Provides AI agents and coding assistants with Twitter data access including tweets, user profiles, followers, and search functionality.
      MIT

    • Twitter/X MCP Server

      Miles0sage
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to interact with Twitter/X through Playwright browser automation without requiring an official API key. It provides tools for posting content, searching tweets, reading feeds, and managing social interactions like follows and likes.
      4
      MIT

    • Spectre

      pranrichh
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to fully automate X/Twitter interactions including searching, posting, engaging, and managing multiple accounts without paid API keys.
      MIT

    • x-mcp-server

      MindMadeLab
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables AI assistants to interact with X (Twitter) API v2 for posting tweets, searching, liking, retweeting, and more through natural language.
      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

    D1.5/5.0

    Scored across 7 tools

    Disambiguation1/5

    No tool descriptions are provided, making it impossible for an agent to distinguish between tools. The tool names alone are too vague and overlapping, e.g., 'copy', 'generate', and 'history' could refer to many different operations.

    Naming Consistency3/5

    All tool names share the 'replyflow_' prefix, which is consistent, but the naming pattern varies: some are single verbs ('copy', 'generate', 'list'), some are nouns ('history'), and others are verb_noun ('switch_account', 'update_config') or noun_noun ('config_status') combinations. This mixed pattern reduces predictability.

    Tool Count5/5

    With 7 tools, the count is well within the typical range of 3–15 tools, suggesting a focused and manageable scope for the server.

    Completeness2/5

    Based solely on tool names, there is no obvious create or delete operation, which are common in many domains. The lack of descriptions makes it impossible to assess completeness, but the set appears to have significant gaps for a typical workflow tool.

    Maintenance

    ActivityStale
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources