Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to Codex Free Worker

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      B
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables Claude Code to delegate tasks such as planning, coding, reviews, debugging, tests, and docs to a cheaper model that works autonomously in a project-sandboxed loop with file, search, and test tools, returning a compact report to save tokens. Routing rules, approval-gated deletes and commands, per-task model/effort settings, and backups keep the user in control of what gets handed off.
      7
      49 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables Claude Code and Claude Desktop to delegate coding tasks to any model available in OpenCode while Claude remains the orchestrator, planning work, reviewing diffs, and running tests. Supports synchronous and async delegation, model selection, session continuation, and permission-aware execution.
      6
      MIT
    • A
      license
      B
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables MCP clients such as Claude Code, Codex CLI, and Cursor-agent to delegate bounded coding tasks to a local OpenCode v2.x installation via a single opencode_execute tool, returning the model's response, git diff/status summary, exit code, and session ID.
      1
      20 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables MCP-capable coding assistants to delegate repository investigation, bounded implementation work, and noisy command runs (tests, builds, linters) to sandboxed OpenCode agents. Each role can use an independently selected model, and only concise results are returned to the parent agent, which keeps responsibility for architecture and high-risk operations.
      MIT

    TDQS

    C2.8/5.0

    Scored across 1 tool

    Disambiguation5/5

    There is only one tool, so there is no possibility of an agent confusing it with another. Its purpose (delegating a bounded repository task) is stated unambiguously in the description.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    The single tool follows a clear verb_noun convention (delegate_task), which is predictable and readable. With one name there is no inconsistency to introduce.

    Tool Count3/5

    A single-tool surface is thin for anything but a very narrow fire-and-forget worker. It is defensible if delegation is the entire purpose, but it leaves no room for the supporting operations such a workflow implies.

    Completeness2/5

    The domain (delegated task execution) typically needs status polling, result retrieval, cancellation, and error handling, none of which exist. An agent can submit work but has no defined path to observe or manage it, assuming the call is asynchronous.