Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to CoS Codex Bridge

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables a restricted, auditable handoff bridge for publishing reviewed project summaries, submitting bounded tasks with idempotency, claiming work via one-time receipts, and reporting status between ChatGPT-compatible MCP clients and local Codex-oriented workers.
      4
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables Codex to supervise one or more local Pi coding-agent workers through bounded task execution, state polling, steering, aborting, and listing. Tasks can run in a direct working directory or isolated Git worktree while Codex remains the planner and reviewer.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables an authenticated persona to run OpenAI Codex coding tasks in an isolated per-user workspace checked out from a configured GitHub repository, with the work committed locally and published to a dedicated work branch. Also exposes task status for the latest run.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables Codex to dispatch well-scoped development tasks to a remote CodeBuddy Code instance, specify model and reasoning effort, monitor progress, retrieve results, and review Git changes without auto-merging.
      6 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Persistently connects Codex to Reasonix Studio so Codex can plan and verify while Reasonix executes, delegating tasks across shared multi-client sessions. Keeps tasks, sessions, approvals, results, and artifact fingerprints durable, with idempotent submission, workspace queuing, session reuse and recovery, manual adjudication of unknown outcomes, explicit retries, cancellation, and bounded shutdown.
      GPL 3.0

    TDQS

    A3.5/5.0

    Scored across 10 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Each tool targets a distinct part of the bridge workflow—submitting, receiving, answering, cancelling, steering, session management, artifacts, projects, diagnostics. The only mild concern is bridge_submit and bridge_steer both relate to continuing or picking up sessions, but the descriptions clarify that steer adopts existing queue items without enqueueing.

    Naming Consistency3/5

    All tools share a consistent bridge_ prefix, which aids discoverability, but the action part mixes noun-style names (bridge_projects, bridge_receipt, bridge_sessions) with verb-style names (bridge_answer, bridge_cancel, bridge_submit, bridge_steer) and one compound (bridge_session_manage). This mixed convention is readable but not a uniform verb_noun pattern.

    Tool Count5/5

    With 10 tools, the server is well within the ideal range and each tool covers a distinct capability needed for the bridge domain. No tool feels redundant, and the count is appropriate for the scope.

    Completeness5/5

    The surface covers the full session lifecycle: submit/continue, answer clarifications, poll receipts, cancel, recover/adopt queue items, and manage sessions. Project aliases, artifacts, and diagnostics round out the supporting needs, so agents are unlikely to hit obvious dead ends.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues