Customer Health MCP
Related Servers
Alternatives to Customer Health MCP
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceExposes simulated Salesforce CRM data as MCP tools for Claude Desktop, enabling customer success managers to prioritize at-risk accounts, review opportunities, cases, and Gong notes via natural language.-
- AlicenseBqualityBmaintenanceEnables an AI agent to analyze synthetic internet-provider data through business-semantic MCP tools for churn, delinquency, cohort retention, sales channels, support tickets, and guarded read-only SQL.13MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables AI assistants to securely query a synthetic health-insurance claims database through read-only, parameterized tools for claims, member histories, coverage rules, and year-to-date summaries. Includes API-key authentication, per-tool authorization, rate limiting, untrusted-text sanitization, and fail-closed audit logging.MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables Claude to answer natural-language questions about a pretend SaaS's weekly signups, individual customer records, and monthly recurring revenue by plan, using three read-only tools backed by demo data and requiring no API keys.19 npmMIT

Retain MCP Serverofficial
AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceEnables AI agents to query customer churn risk, MRR at risk, and customer health profiles from Retain, and take actions like adding notes and marking alerts contacted.832 npm1MIT- FlicenseBqualityCmaintenanceExposes a churn risk model, a support ticket classifier, and a retrieval-augmented policy Q&A pipeline as callable MCP tools. Enables any MCP-aware AI client to orchestrate all three capabilities within a single conversation.3-
TDQS
Scored across 4 tools
list_accounts and list_at_risk_accounts both return account lists and could be momentarily confused, but the descriptions make the filtering intent distinct (plan/payment vs risk band). get_account_details (raw data) vs get_account_risk_summary (synthesized score/drivers) are cleanly separated.
All four tools follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern using list_/get_ prefixes and predictable noun phrases. No mixing of conventions or stylistic outliers.
Four read-only tools is well-scoped for a churn-risk analytics surface, with no redundant entries. It is slightly lean—no mutation or annotation tools—but each tool earns its place.
The read-only lifecycle is well covered: overview, at-risk ranking, raw detail, and risk synthesis with explicit follow-up pathways. Minor gaps exist (no way to list support tickets globally, no account-level write/annotation), but core workflows have no dead ends.