Skip to main content
Glama
Alberto-Codes

docvet

by Alberto-Codes
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to docvet

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • mcp-lint-tools

      rog0x
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Code linting and style checking tools for AI agents, exposed as an MCP server. Supports style checks, naming conventions, complexity analysis, dead code detection, and import analysis.
      25 npm
      MIT

    • QE-MCP

      mov2day
      F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      A Python-based MCP server that enforces configurable Quality Assurance automation strategies for AI coding agents, ensuring generated tests adhere to strict architectural and testing standards.
      -

    • Evergreen

      hganumpally-a360
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to read, write, and maintain documentation through an MCP server, providing tools for asking questions, generating docs, checking drift, and exploring knowledge graph.
      15 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

    A3.9/5.0

    Scored across 2 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    The two tools serve clearly distinct purposes: docvet_check executes checks and returns findings, while docvet_rules lists rule metadata and fix guidance. There is no overlap, and the check tool explicitly points to the rules tool for next steps.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    Both tools use a consistent snake_case pattern with the shared 'docvet_' prefix. However, the second parts differ in form ('check' is an action, 'rules' is a resource), which is a minor deviation from a pure verb_noun convention.

    Tool Count4/5

    Two tools are slightly under the typical 3-15 range, but each earns its place in this narrow, well-scoped docstring-checking domain. The check tool is feature-rich, so the set does not feel arbitrarily thin.

    Completeness4/5

    The core workflow—run checks, then look up rule guidance—is fully covered, and the check tool handles configuration errors gracefully. Minor gaps exist, such as no direct auto-fix or fix-application tool, but these are not essential for the stated purpose.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessResponsive

    Resources