Skip to main content
Glama
vystartasv

Works With Agents MCP Server

by vystartasv
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

Related Servers

Alternatives to Works With Agents MCP Server

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • AgentsGate by agentsgate

      AgentsGateofficial

      agentsgate
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to securely call MCP tools with risk scoring, checkpoints, rollback, and approval workflows.
      1 npm
      MIT

    • Agentic Control Plane (ACP)

      Rajmohan80
      F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      A governed MCP server that enforces OAuth 2.1 scope checking and policy-driven access control for AI agents, providing a full audit trail on every tool call. It includes tools for Cisco Webex Contact Center knowledge search and SD-WAN network operations.
      -

    • Foundry Agents MCP Server

      denniszielke
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Exposes Azure AI Foundry agents, workflows, and AI Search vector-database capabilities as MCP tools, enabling natural language interaction with agents, semantic search, and index management.
      10
      2
      MIT
    • Scout MCP Server by scoutos-labs

      Scout MCP Serverofficial

      scoutos-labs
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to interact with Scout Live platform capabilities through standardized MCP primitives, including tools for app management, deployment, and logging.
      6
      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

    A3.5/5.0

    Scored across 22 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Most tools target clearly distinct resources and actions, with the wwa_ prefix helping to group them. However, wwa_handoff_verify and wwa_handoff_validate_schema both validate handoffs and could be confused, as could wwa_bid_search and wwa_bid_list despite their differing purposes.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    All tools share the wwa_ prefix, and the majority follow a noun_verb pattern (e.g., wwa_bid_search, wwa_sla_validate). The main deviation is wwa_generate_key, which uses verb_noun ordering, and a few compound names like wwa_facts_list_categories add minor complexity.

    Tool Count3/5

    With 22 tools, the server is on the heavier side (16-25 tools per the rubric) but not extreme. The wide range of domains (tenders, bids, facts, skills, handoffs, blueprints, etc.) makes the count feel somewhat bloated, though each tool does have a distinct role.

    Completeness3/5

    Several resources have incomplete lifecycles: bids can be indexed and retrieved but not updated or deleted; facts and skills only support querying/list categories, with no create/update/delete; handoffs have create and validation but no retrieval or management operations. These gaps are notable but not critical, as the server may focus on specific workflows rather than full CRUD.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessSyncing

    Resources