Skip to main content
Glama
912925635

Codex Team Workbench

by 912925635

Related Servers

Alternatives to Codex Team Workbench

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents like Codex, Grok Build, and Antigravity to share persistent local memory, preferences, project context, tasks, and handoffs using Markdown and SQLite.
      1
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables task management with persistent SQLite storage, along with tools, resources, subscriptions, prompts, and completions over stdio or Streamable HTTP with per-user authentication.
      7 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to retrieve project briefings, reserve and track tasks, and record checkpoints, passages, messages, and durable context so another AI can resume work using local SQLite-backed project memory.
      10,856 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables coding agents to persist and resume shared working state—tasks, progress, decisions, commands, tests, checkpoints, and handoffs—backed by SQLite while keeping Git authoritative for files and repository state.
      MIT
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables AI coding agents to read and write persistent local memory during sessions, storing and semantically searching project decisions, preferences, error patterns, guidelines, and cross-project standards from SQLite stores on the user's machine. An optional companion server also exposes an autonomous task queue for executing queued work.
      -
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to store, search, and manage persistent memories, todos, kanban boards, reminders, and progress trackers in a local SQLite database.
      1
      Apache 2.0

    TDQS

    B3.3/5.0

    Scored across 16 tools

    Disambiguation3/5

    Six tools (team_report_member, team_observe_runtime, team_record_execution, team_append_record, team_import_thread_page, team_bind_agent_activity) all revolve around relaying and recording observations of agents, differing only by which artifact is captured, which is a heavy cognitive load for selection. The long, caveat-laden descriptions do carve out boundaries (reported vs observed vs execution receipt vs thread page), but the distinctions require careful reading rather than being obvious from the names.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    All tools share a consistent team_ prefix in snake_case with a mostly verb_noun structure (team_create_task, team_update_task, team_observe_runtime, team_read_records). Minor deviations are team_panel and team_snapshot, which are noun-only rather than verb-led, plus the slight verb variance between 'record' and 'report'.

    Tool Count3/5

    At 16 tools this is at the upper edge of a well-scoped set, and the bulk of the surface is dedicated to provenance/observation plumbing rather than the core board operations. The count is defensible given the layered trust model, but several recording tools could plausibly be consolidated into a single parameterized record call.

    Completeness4/5

    Board lifecycle (create, bind, archive/restore, snapshot), task lifecycle (create, update with claim/release/complete/reopen/edit/reassign/soft delete), and rich observation/record coverage are all present. Gaps are minor and mostly intentional: no record update or deletion, no member removal, and no explicit way to close out or retire a recorded workflow group.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues