Skip to main content
Glama
Cohexa-ai

Agent Coherence — Stale Write Guard (FS)

Official
by Cohexa-ai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to Agent Coherence — Stale Write Guard (FS)

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • fencepost

      ritaprieto900
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables multiple agents sharing one working tree to claim, renew, release, and verify exclusive leases with strictly increasing fencing tokens, so a stale or evicted holder is refused at the write. Provides mediated writes that re-verify the token immediately before touching the target, with path confinement and no daemon.
      11 npm
      MIT

    • agentclaim

      volkangunay
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables multiple AI coding agents to safely collaborate in the same git working tree by managing file ownership, merging writes, and preventing snapshot races.
      3 npm
      2
      MIT

    • JEVULON VII (JVII)

      Jason-Fay
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables parallel AI coding agents to claim files atomically, detect and prevent workspace collisions, and receive deterministic zero-latency safety verdicts on destructive shell commands without any network egress. It also provides autonomous wave dispatch, worker recovery, and completion verification for multi-agent workflows via a shared coordination board.
      7
      6 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

    A4.2/5.0

    Scored across 10 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Each tool targets a distinct role/action: read, write, CAS-write, gate, reacquire, status, and the handoff lifecycle (transfer/accept/decline/withdraw). The two write tools (swg_write vs swg_write_cas) are the most likely to be confused, and the densely overlapping vocabulary around handoffs adds some cognitive load, but the descriptions do draw clear boundaries.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Every tool uses the same swg_ prefix followed by a consistent snake_case verb or verb_noun form (swg_read, swg_write, swg_write_cas, swg_transfer, swg_accept, swg_decline, swg_withdraw, swg_reacquire, swg_gate, swg_status). No mixing of conventions or casing styles.

    Tool Count5/5

    Ten tools is well-scoped for a stale-write-guard/coherence domain. Each tool covers a necessary operation (core read/write/CAS/gate/reacquire plus the full handoff lifecycle and status) without redundancy.

    Completeness4/5

    The surface covers the core lifecycle: read, write, CAS, pre-action gate, stale-view recovery, status, and the complete transfer/accept/decline/withdraw handoff flow. There is no explicit delete or path-enumeration tool, but swg_status partially surfaces tracked paths, so gaps are minor.

    Maintenance

    ActivityActive
    ResponsivenessWithin a week

    Resources