Skip to main content
Glama
zelinsky-alexander

MCP Drift Lab

by zelinsky-alexander
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Related Servers

Alternatives to MCP Drift Lab

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • indaga-agent

      birinets
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      A local-first MCP server for querying multi-omic personal health data (genome, labs, wearables) with an honesty contract and progressive disclosure skills.
      1
      AGPL 3.0

    • MCP Scope Consent

      clauxel
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Hosted remote MCP server for managing consent scope receipts, enabling checking, issuing, and auditing consent policies and tool calls.
      MIT

    • mcp-lens

      helygp
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      A reference implementation of the mcp-lens pattern for progressive disclosure in MCP servers. It exposes three stable meta-tools to search, inspect, and execute capabilities, keeping tool-definition costs constant as the catalog grows.
      3
      Apache 2.0

    • grant-mcp

      vertical-mcp
      A
      license
      B
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      MCP server for searching research grants across NSF (US), ERC (EU), and KRF/NRF (Korea) via a unified interface. NIH excluded—covered by existing connectors.
      3
      8 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

    A3.9/5.0

    Scored across 3 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    The tools are mostly distinct: read_demo_record reads a record, while write_demo_note and send_demo_message both write to the sink but with different purposes (note vs. simulated message). The two write tools could be slightly confused at first glance, but descriptions clarify the difference.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tool names follow a consistent verb_demo_noun pattern (read_demo_record, write_demo_note, send_demo_message), using lowercase with underscores. The verbs are clear and the pattern is uniform.

    Tool Count5/5

    With only 3 tools, the server is tightly scoped for a synthetic demo environment. Each tool serves a clear purpose, and the count falls well within the expected 3-15 range.

    Completeness3/5

    The server provides a read operation for records but no corresponding write for records, and the write tools for notes/messages lack any read or list mechanism. This creates a notable gap, as written data cannot be retrieved, though the demo nature of the server mitigates the impact.

    Maintenance

    ActivityStale
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources