Skip to main content
Glama
upamune

human-mcp

by upamune
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to human-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • call-a-human-mcp

      nishantmodak
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      An MCP server that enables AI agents to pause and request human approval or information via Slack, Telegram, or macOS dialogs before proceeding with actions.
      2
      15
      Apache 2.0

    • Interactive Feedback MCP

      ISimon3
      F
      license
      B
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      MCP server that enables human-in-the-loop workflow in AI-assisted development tools by allowing users to provide direct feedback to AI agents without consuming additional premium requests.
      1
      1
      -

    • AskOnSlackMCP

      trtd56
      F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      A Human-in-the-Loop MCP server that enables AI assistants to request information or clarification from humans via Slack. It uses real-time, thread-based conversations with socket mode integration to bridge the gap between AI systems and human experts.
      6
      -

    • askahuman-mcp

      AskAHumanOnline
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      An MCP server that enables AI agents to request human verification for tasks requiring real-world understanding, paying via the Lightning Network, and receiving verified answers.
      12 npm
      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

    B3.2/5.0

    Scored across 7 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool corresponds to a distinct human sensory organ or function (ear, eye, hand, mouth, nose, taste, weather), with no overlap in purpose. The descriptions clearly differentiate their roles, such as hearing sounds, seeing visuals, physical manipulation, speaking, smelling, tasting, and weather reporting, making misselection unlikely.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tool names follow a consistent 'human_[organ/function]_tool' pattern using snake_case. This uniform naming convention makes the tools predictable and easy to identify, with no deviations or mixed styles across the set.

    Tool Count4/5

    With 7 tools, the count is reasonable for covering human sensory and basic environmental interactions. It's slightly lean for a broad 'human' scope but well-scoped for sensory functions, with each tool earning its place without feeling excessive or thin.

    Completeness4/5

    The tool set provides good coverage for human sensory inputs (sight, sound, smell, taste, touch) and basic actions (speaking, weather checking). Minor gaps exist, such as no tools for cognitive functions like thinking or memory, but agents can work around this for the stated sensory domain.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources