A
licenseB
qualityD
maintenanceEnables interaction with GitHub repositories through the GitHub API, allowing file operations, repository management, issue tracking, and code search through natural language commands.
33
15 npm
4
MIT
GitHub MCP Server
by BBsBrezz
Related Servers
Alternatives to GitHub MCP Server
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceEnables comprehensive GitHub operations through natural language including file management, repository administration, issue tracking, and advanced code searching.4746 npm1MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityNot gradedmaintenanceEnables comprehensive interaction with GitHub repositories, including code management, issues, pull requests, and full GitHub Actions workflow control with triggering, monitoring, and artifact management capabilities.81 npm-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables interaction with GitHub API for repository management, commits, pushes, and pulls through natural language.346 npm1ISC
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables comprehensive interaction with the GitHub API, including file operations, repository management, issue tracking, pull request workflows, and advanced search functionality across code, issues, and users.132,954 npmMIT
- FlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceEnables interaction with GitHub repositories, issues, pull requests, code search, branches, and GitHub Actions workflows.822 npm-
TDQS
C2.9/5.0
Scored across 20 tools
Disambiguation4/5
Most tools have clearly distinct resource+action targets, and the singular/plural distinction between list and detail tools (get_issues vs get_issue) is understandable. Minor ambiguity exists between the workflow_run and workflow_runs tools and between job logs and workflow run jobs, but descriptions largely disambiguate.
Naming Consistency4/5
The github_ prefix and verb_noun pattern is applied consistently across most tools, making the surface predictable. However, the set mixes full names and abbreviations for the same resource (get_pull_request vs get_pr_files/get_pr_comments), which is an avoidable inconsistency.
Tool Count4/5
20 tools is on the heavier side but justified by the breadth of the GitHub domain (repos, issues, PRs, commits, workflows, files). Each tool maps to a distinct read or action, so the count stays reasonable rather than bloated.
Completeness3/5
The surface is read-heavy and covers listing/detail/creation for issues and PRs, plus comments, files, and workflow runs. Notable gaps remain: no update or close for issues/PRs, no merge_pull_request, no release/repo creation, and no search, which will cause dead ends for common write workflows.
Maintenance
ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues