Skip to main content
Glama
2001Y

CodeRabbit CLI MCP

by 2001Y
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to CodeRabbit CLI MCP

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • Review MCP Server

      je4550
      F
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables Claude to perform thorough code reviews by integrating with Codex and Gemini CLIs to provide senior-level feedback on code quality, security, performance, and best practices. Supports reviewing code snippets, individual files, or entire directories with automatic detection of available review tools.
      4
      -

    • Cursor Reviewer MCP

      kodaimaehata
      A
      license
      C
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables code review through Cursor CLI integration with GPT-5. Provides a cursor.review tool that executes code reviews and returns structured JSON results with automatic audit logging.
      2
      MIT

    • ai-review

      mdanouf44-cyber
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables interactive GitHub pull-request review from Claude Code, with tools to fetch PRs, inspect files and repo structure, post review comments, and query a RAG index of the codebase.
      1
      MIT

    • Git Code Review MCP

      AyoubTRD
      A
      license
      B
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables AI assistants to perform code reviews by providing access to staged files, git diffs, and repository file content. It allows users to evaluate changes and context within any local git repository before committing or pushing.
      3
      4 npm
      ISC
    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

    D1.7/5.0

    Scored across 1 tool

    Disambiguation5/5

    With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusing it with another. The single tool's purpose is unambiguous within the set, even though its description is missing.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    The tool name 'run_review' follows a clear verb_noun pattern. Since there is only one tool, naming consistency is trivially maintained.

    Tool Count2/5

    A single tool is extremely thin for a server claiming to represent a CLI. Even a narrow-purpose server typically needs more than one operation to be useful, making this count feel inadequate.

    Completeness1/5

    The server only offers 'run_review', with no way to retrieve review results, list past reviews, or manage settings. This severely limits the functionality and leaves obvious gaps for any real-world workflow.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources