Skip to main content
Glama
wiresage

MikroTik MCP

by wiresage
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Related Servers

Alternatives to MikroTik MCP

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • MikroTik MCP

      tarcisiodier
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      A bridge between AI assistants and MikroTik RouterOS devices, allowing natural language interaction to manage network configurations including VLANs, firewalls, DNS settings, and more.
      1
      MIT

    • io.github.jeff

      halid9
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Bridges AI assistants with MikroTik RouterOS devices, enabling natural language management of network configurations, firewall, VLANs, VPNs, and diagnostics via ~300 tools.
      1
      MIT

    • mikrotik-mcp

      nickcheban
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Provides read-only (with limited address-list management) access to MikroTik RouterOS routers, enabling monitoring of system info, interfaces, DHCP leases, firewall rules, and more via natural language.
      1
      MIT

    • RouterOS MCP Server

      sevaepsteyn
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables AI assistants to interact with MikroTik RouterOS devices through API and SSH connections, supporting network monitoring, configuration management, and diagnostics across multiple routers with automatic connection fallback.
      3
      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

    C2.6/5.0

    Scored across 196 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Most tools target distinct resource+action pairs with clear descriptions, but there are overlapping clusters: 10 log-related tools, legacy wireless tools (marked not supported in RouterOS v7) that duplicate newer wireless tools, and multiple route-adding variants. These create some risk of misselection, though the descriptions help distinguish them.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    Nearly all tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (e.g., list_dhcp_servers, create_dhcp_server, remove_dhcp_server). Minor inconsistency exists between add_ and create_ for adding objects (add_ip_address vs create_vlan_interface), and a few noun-phrase names like safe_mode_status, but the overall convention is strong.

    Tool Count1/5

    196 tools is an extreme mismatch for a single MCP server. Even for a complex router OS, this count is far beyond what an agent can manage effectively, and many operations could be consolidated or abstracted. The rubric threshold of 50+ tools places this at the lowest score.

    Completeness3/5

    The server covers many areas with reasonable CRUD, but notable gaps exist: no bridge configuration (bridge/ports/VLANs), no PPPoE server/client, no hotspot, no IP service management, and incomplete DHCP pool management (missing list/get/update/remove). These gaps will cause agent failures for common router setup tasks.

    Maintenance

    ActivityActive
    ResponsivenessSlow

    Resources