No user-submitted related servers found.
Scored across 39 tools
Tools target distinct Harbor resources, but the singular/plural pairs (harbor_project vs harbor_projects, harbor_replication_policy vs harbor_replication_policies, harbor_replication_execution vs harbor_replication_executions, harbor_retention_executions vs harbor_retention_tasks) plus the log/metric variants create easy misselection traps. Descriptions do carry the distinguishing detail, but an agent must read them carefully rather than pattern-match on the name.
Nearly all tools use a consistent harbor_<noun> snake_case convention with singular for get-one and plural for list, which is readable and predictable. The deviations are undo_list/undo_apply (outside the harbor_ namespace and verb-first) and harbor_diagnose, which are minor but noticeable.
39 tools is heavy for a single server and pushes well past the comfortable 3-15 range; several near-duplicates (harbor_scan_all_metrics vs harbor_scheduled_scan_metrics, three separate replication/retention log tools, harbor_diagnose overlapping the probes it correlates) inflate the surface. Each maps to a real Harbor endpoint, but the set is broad enough to burden tool selection.
Read/diagnostic coverage of the registry is strong — projects, repos, artifacts, tags, scans, quotas, GC, replication, retention, health and audit logs are all reachable. Write coverage is thin: only scan_artifact, create_tag and delete_tag mutate state, so project/repository/artifact/policy lifecycle operations and credential or quota management are notable gaps.