Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to qa-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to drive the 1C:Enterprise test client directly, opening forms, reading and modifying data, working with tables, and recording or replaying action scenarios. Connects to local or remote test clients over their network protocol without a testing manager.
      10
      50
      AGPL 3.0
    • A
      license
      C
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to interactively drive 1C:Enterprise UI through the testing client, including opening forms, clicking buttons, filling fields, and capturing evidence.
      129
      5
      MIT
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Acts as a bridge between AI agents (Claude, Cursor) and 1C:Enterprise databases, enabling metadata retrieval, configuration analysis, and code generation through natural language using the MCP protocol.
      -
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Integrates AI agents with 1C:Enterprise databases via MCP and REST API, supporting a built-in HTTP server (no Python required) or a Python proxy mode.
      279
      GPL 3.0

    TDQS

    B3.2/5.0

    Scored across 64 tools

    Disambiguation3/5

    Many tools have overlapping purposes, especially the write_form_value variants (write_form_value, write_form_value_xtest, write_form_values, write_form_fields_by_label), the read_list_* family (column/row/grid), and several assert/read tools. The very detailed descriptions help differentiate them, but an agent still faces non-trivial selection risk across 64 tools with similar naming.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    The vast majority of tools use consistent snake_case verb_noun naming (run_scenario, read_record, write_form_value, open_list, select_table_row). A few exceptions are noun-only or diagnostic names (advanced_search, com_connector_doctor, infobase_info, qa_mcp_doctor, role_data_matrix, test_client_status), and one has a suffix (get_window_list_testclient), but the overall pattern is predictable.

    Tool Count2/5

    64 tools is far above a typical well-scoped set and exceeds the 25+ threshold for 'too many'. The domain is broad (1C client lifecycle, UI automation, scenario running, diagnostics), so some count is justified, but many tools are granular variants of the same underlying operations, making the surface heavier than necessary.

    Completeness4/5

    Coverage is extensive: client launch/attach/stop, form and list reads, form/table/cell writes, dialogs, menus, choices, checkboxes, pages, reports, scenario execution, and diagnostics. A few boundaries remain (multi-select read across commands, backward year navigation in date cells, spreadsheet cell decode deferred), but these are minor workarounds rather than glaring gaps.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues