Skip to main content
Glama
51ck

frontier-mcp

by 51ck
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to frontier-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • project-context

      sandovalrr
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      A local, provider-neutral MCP server for repository-scoped issue handling. It provides a guarded interface to Linear, GitHub Issues, GitHub Projects v2, and Jira Cloud, with preview/apply safety and host-local configuration.
      51 npm
      1
      MIT

    • GitHub Projects MCP Server

      jamescalam
      F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Provides an MCP server for scraping and retrieving data from GitHub Projects, including issues, pull requests, and organizational metadata. It enables natural language interaction with project boards and repository contents using GitHub Personal Access Tokens.
      1
      -

    • brainforge-mcp

      mengro1102
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      An MCP server that transforms markdown notes into an AI-powered knowledge graph. It enables LLM clients to explore, analyze, and diagnose knowledge graphs through tools for node explanation, path finding, causal chain analysis, and wiki health reporting.
      5
      MIT

    • tasks-mcp

      outputty
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      An MCP server that exposes outputty's task tracker as typed tools backed by GitHub Issues, allowing coding agents to manage tasks with two-way sync.
      21
      51 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

    A4.3/5.0

    Scored across 8 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool targets a distinct resource or action: get_tickets fetches bodies, get_board provides an overview, create_tickets does batch creation, update_ticket handles single modifications, edit_map and spec manage different document types, and migrate_effort is a utility for normalization. No two tools have overlapping purposes.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    Most tools follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (get_tickets, list_efforts, create_tickets, update_ticket, edit_map, migrate_effort). The lone exception is 'spec', which uses a bare noun instead of a verb, creating a minor inconsistency but remaining clear and predictable.

    Tool Count5/5

    With 8 tools, the server is well-scoped for its purpose of managing efforts, tickets, maps, and specs. Each tool serves a distinct function without redundancy, and the count is squarely within the optimal 3-15 range.

    Completeness4/5

    The core ticket lifecycle is covered (batch create, single update, read via board and bodies), along with map and spec editing and migration. The main gap is the lack of a delete or archive tool for tickets, and there is no explicit create_effort tool, though create_tickets references needing one. These are minor gaps given the planning-centric focus.

    Maintenance

    ActivityActive
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources