Skip to main content
Glama
3486038424

graph-arch

by 3486038424
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to graph-arch

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • LensPR

      kyrylopr
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      MCP server that builds a dependency graph of your codebase, giving AI agents structural understanding to analyze impact, find context, and make safe modifications across languages and infrastructure.
      MIT

    • NOMIK

      willFreed1
      F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      AI-native code intelligence graph that builds a persistent knowledge graph of your codebase in Neo4j and exposes it to AI assistants via MCP, enabling contextual code analysis, impact analysis, and dependency tracking.
      23
      -

    • codemap

      abdul-hamid-achik
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      MCP server for local-first code intelligence, providing structural code graph, semantic search, and impact analysis to AI agents.
      2
      MIT

    • uacos

      caotiensinh
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Local-first code intelligence and safety layer for AI coding agents. MCP server exposes dependency graph, impact analysis, and AST-compressed repo context, backed by typed local memory, patch-scope safety gates, and git-independent transaction rollback.
      1
      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

    A4.4/5.0

    Scored across 7 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    query_impact and query_context are clearly differentiated by their focus (propagation vs. navigation), and the core command/voting tools are distinct. However, get_pending_intents and get_pending_tasks share a similar prefix and both return lists, so an agent could initially confuse them; descriptions mitigate but do not fully eliminate this.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    Most tools follow a snake_case verb_noun pattern (query_impact, submit_graph_intent, claim_task, get_pending_tasks, get_pending_intents). graph_revision deviates as a noun-only identifier, and there is minor verb variance (query vs. get vs. submit), but the overall pattern is readable and predictable.

    Tool Count5/5

    Seven tools is well within the ideal range for a specialized graph/context server. Each tool serves a distinct part of the investigate-assess-claim-submit-review workflow with no obvious redundancy or bloat.

    Completeness4/5

    The tool surface covers the core lifecycle: context discovery, impact analysis, task retrieval/claiming, intent submission, pending-intent review, and revision tracking. Minor gaps exist—such as no explicit intent-cancellation or node-detail tool—but query_context and query_impact fill most needs and the workflow appears functional.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources