Skip to main content
Glama
Hadar301

openshift-installer-checker

by Hadar301

Related Servers

Alternatives to openshift-installer-checker

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • F
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Clones and inspects public GitHub repositories to extract evidence like manifests, dependencies, and version hints, and can run allow-listed repos in isolated Docker containers for reproducible verification.
      4
      -
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables analysis of local Git repositories via standard git commands, providing insights like line authorship, commit frequency, code churn, and co-changed files.
      -
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Analyzes Microsoft Sentinel solutions from GitHub repositories to map data connectors to Log Analytics tables and query security content like detections and playbooks. It provides instant access to the official Content Hub or private repositories through a high-performance pre-built index.
      23
      8 npm
      1
      MIT
    • F
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables agents to autonomously investigate deployment health by inspecting Kubernetes resources, comparing live cluster state against Git, and correlating findings with Dynatrace problems.
      11
      1
      -
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables users to profile public GitHub repositories via a single tool, checking for Spring/Java structure such as pom.xml, src/main/java, Java file counts, and Spring layer annotations to assess suitability for deep local analysis.
      -

    TDQS

    A4.8/5.0

    Scored across 3 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: fetching repo requirements, scanning cluster resources, and comparing the two for feasibility. The descriptions include explicit usage rules and 'DO NOT USE' guidance, so an agent should not confuse them.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tool names follow the same imperative verb_noun pattern: fetch_repo_content, scan_cluster, check_feasibility. Naming style is consistent and predictable.

    Tool Count5/5

    Three tools is appropriate for a single focused workflow: gather repo requirements, gather cluster state, and assess feasibility. Each tool is necessary and none feels redundant.

    Completeness5/5

    The server covers the full lifecycle of its purpose: extracting requirements from a repository, scanning the cluster, and combining the two in a feasibility check. No obvious dead ends or missing operations for the stated domain.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessNo issues