Laver
Related Servers
Alternatives to Laver
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceSelf-hosted kanban board that dispatches AI agent fleets against tickets. The embedded Streamable HTTP /mcp endpoint exposes 7 tools to list projects, read boards and tickets, and create, move and comment tickets from any MCP client.26AGPL 3.0
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceEnables AI agents and humans to collaboratively manage kanban boards and Markdown documentation via MCP tools, with stable item keys, revision-safe editing, and full audit trails.MIT
- AlicenseBqualityBmaintenanceProvides a local-first MCP interface for managing SQLite-backed projects, boards, and tickets, including metrics, epics, documentation links, run-history, and staging-lease coordination with completion summaries for done items.32MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceA local kanban board and docs tool that AI agents can drive over MCP. It enables project management without accounts or API keys.MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceA local-first Kanban system with MCP tools for AI agents to manage tickets, features, and tasks, paired with a React UI for human users.-
- AlicenseBqualityFmaintenanceEnables AI agents and humans to collaboratively plan and manage tasks with a shared kanban and dependency graph, all stored locally.3129 npm81MIT
TDQS
Scored across 30 tools
Each tool targets a distinct resource (ticket, board, wiki, automation, workspace) and a distinct action (list, create, get, update, move, etc.). Even similar tools like list_tickets and get_board are clearly separated by their descriptions. There is no ambiguity about which tool to call for a given operation.
Tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern throughout, e.g., list_tickets, create_ticket, update_ticket, get_wiki_page, restore_wiki. The only minor deviation is 'search' and 'comment_on_ticket', but the pattern remains predictable. No mixing of case or conventions.
With 30 tools, the surface is large, which could overwhelm agents. However, the server covers a broad domain (tickets, attachments, wiki, automations, boards) and each tool appears purposeful. It's on the heavy side but not extreme for the scope.
Ticket and attachment operations are fully covered, including archive/delete and comments. Wiki pages support create/append/versioning but intentionally not edit/delete. A notable gap is automation rules: they can be created and listed but not updated or deleted, which is a missing lifecycle.