Skip to main content
Glama
yaotsakpo

@inbin/mcp

by yaotsakpo

Related Servers

Alternatives to @inbin/mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables AI tools to uniformly discover, inspect, and call tools, prompts, and resources from multiple upstream MCP servers through a small set of fixed MCP tools, over stdio or HTTP.
      2
      MIT
    • F
      license
      C
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Schema-driven MCP server that exposes all Paperclip API operations as typed MCP tools over stdio or Streamable HTTP, supporting both authenticated and local_mode deployments.
      100
      -
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Proxy-style MCP tool multiplexer that aggregates multiple downstream stdio MCP servers into one, offering meta-tools for status, search, call, parallel, batch, and pipeline operations with concurrency control and caching.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      A thin stdio-to-HTTP bridge that forwards MCP messages to the hosted Proxycept server, enabling stdio-only MCP clients to access Proxycept's tool catalog.
      2 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Thin stdio proxy to Pifini's hosted MCP server (real events, reviewed places, and ticket checkout across the Caribbean & Latin America). MIT, zero dependencies.
      6
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      A stdio MCP proxy that connects to one or more upstream MCP servers and exposes their tools, resources, and prompts through a single endpoint with a configurable middleware pipeline.
      14
      6 npm
      3
      MIT

    TDQS

    A4.4/5.0

    Scored across 5 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    The five tools map to clearly distinct phases of one workflow (create, wait for mail, initiate claim, wait for claim, poll status), and the verbose descriptions explicitly state when each should be used. The only real overlap is between await_trial_inbox_claim and claim_connection_status, which both report claim state; the blocking vs non-blocking distinction is spelled out but an agent could still pick the wrong one.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    All names are snake_case verb-first (create_, await_, claim_), which is predictable. There is a minor deviation in object ordering: 'claim_trial_inbox' vs 'await_trial_inbox_claim' describe related actions with different word orders, and 'claim_connection_status' drops the trial_inbox subject, adding mild inconsistency.

    Tool Count5/5

    Five tools for a narrowly scoped trial-inbox onboarding service is well-sized: each tool covers a necessary step (create, wait, claim, wait-for-claim, check status) without redundancy. Nothing feels padded or missing at the count level.

    Completeness4/5

    The trial-inbox lifecycle is covered end to end: obtain an address, receive the confirmation, convert it into a permanent claimed connection, and observe installation status. Minor gaps exist — no way to list existing inboxes/claims, read arbitrary later mail, or release/expire an inbox — but the descriptions note these are handled elsewhere or by other clients.

    Maintenance

    ActivitySlowing
    ResponsivenessNo issues