Skip to main content
Glama
connexagents-mcp

connexagents-mcp

by JLDLab

Related Servers

Alternatives to connexagents-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables agents to file structured asks and park when they need a human, so people can answer blockers, grills, and secret requests from one queue while secrets stay out of model context.
      1
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables routing tasks to the right specialist agents, assembling the needed context from a layered catalog of agents, skills, knowledge, runbooks, topics, tools, and connectors, while remembering how a business wants work done.
      10
      16 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to submit work for human review over MCP or REST, then retrieve approvals, edits, or change requests without blocking. Reviewers can approve, edit, or send back items from a web or phone interface.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables MCP clients to asynchronously dispatch prompts to registered agents, keep working, then poll events and status to observe results and record resolutions for iterative handoff or review loops.
      Apache 2.0
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables lane-scoped revenue-alignment workflows through an opportunity ledger, capability registry, advisory matching, candidate submission, and pipeline summaries over MCP.
      Apache 2.0

    TDQS

    A3.9/5.0

    Scored across 3 tools

    Disambiguation3/5

    find_specialist is semantically misleading: its name implies retrieval of a specialist, but it only creates a review record, while list_match_proposals is the tool that surfaces actual proposals. Descriptions do clarify the boundary and get_handoff_status is distinct, but an agent skimming names could easily pick the wrong one when looking for an existing specialist.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    All three names follow a snake_case verb_noun pattern (find_/get_/list_ + resource), which is predictable and readable. The only blemish is that 'find' implies a lookup that the tool does not perform, which is a semantic mismatch rather than a pattern break.

    Tool Count3/5

    Three tools is thin for a handoff lifecycle, though the surface is deliberately narrow (submit a need, poll status, list proposals). It sits at the borderline where the set feels under-built rather than well-scoped.

    Completeness2/5

    Coverage is create + read + list, with no update, cancel/withdraw, or accept/decline path, and no way to enumerate your own handoffs — so an agent that loses a handoff_id has a dead end. Responding to a proposal or inspecting specialist details is also impossible, which will cause workflow failures.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues