Skip to main content
Glama
yvanfreitas

MCP Test Server

by yvanfreitas

Related Servers

Alternatives to MCP Test Server

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      A simple Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that allows LLMs to create and manage user entries in a JSON file system database.
      1,632 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      A comprehensive and efficient Model Context Protocol server for task management that works with Claude, Cursor, and other MCP clients, providing powerful search, filtering, and organization capabilities across multiple file formats.
      5
      303 npm
      47
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      A unified Model Context Protocol server that provides a consistent interface for AI assistants to interact with productivity tools like Linear, GitHub, Slack, and Notion. It enables users to search, retrieve, and manage tasks and data across multiple workplace services from a single endpoint.
      14 npm
      MIT
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      A Model Context Protocol server that provides persistent task management capabilities for AI assistants, allowing them to create, update, and track tasks beyond their usual context limitations.
      5
      -
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      A remote Model Context Protocol server that enables AI assistants to interact with external services through standardized JSON-RPC, providing tools for basic operations and conversation archiving.
      334 npm
      MIT

    TDQS

    B3.3/5.0

    Scored across 8 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Every tool has a clearly distinct purpose with no ambiguity. The tools are cleanly separated by resource (task vs. user) and action (create, get, update, search), making it easy for an agent to select the correct one. There is no overlap in functionality that would cause confusion.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    The tool names follow a highly consistent verb_noun pattern throughout (e.g., create_task, get_user, update_task). All tools use snake_case and consistent verb choices (create, get, update, search), with no deviations or mixed conventions.

    Tool Count5/5

    With 8 tools, the count is well-scoped and appropriate for the server's purpose of managing tasks and users. Each tool earns its place, covering core operations without being overly sparse or bloated, fitting typical expectations for such a domain.

    Completeness4/5

    The tool set provides strong CRUD coverage for tasks (create, get, update, and implicit delete via absence) and users (create, get), with a search tool for both. A minor gap exists in not having update_user or delete operations explicitly, but agents can work around this with the available tools.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessNo issues