Skip to main content
Glama
KyaniteLabs

checkyourself

by KyaniteLabs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to checkyourself

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • Obra CTO

      lilycip
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      A local-first MCP server that scores your codebase's Build Readiness by reading code and running tests on your machine, outputting a diligence-grade score and risk register without uploading your source.
      5
      77 npm
      Apache 2.0

    • McpApp

      krok1029
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Provides a local-first MCP server for AI-native software delivery, enabling structured specifications, human approval gates, controlled repository operations, verification evidence, review, and traceability.
      Apache 2.0

    • Data Product Hub

      armalite
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      A production-ready MCP server that provides comprehensive dbt project quality assessment for any GitHub repository, enabling AI agents to analyze dbt models, check metadata coverage, and map data lineage.
      9
      MIT

    • devpulse-mcp

      tao-izm
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Zero-config MCP server that gives AI coding assistants a real-time diagnostic snapshot of your local dev environment. Detects framework, running services, recent errors, git state, and provides a health diagnosis in one call.
      3
      11 npm
      1
      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

    A4.1/5.0

    Scored across 11 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Most tools have clearly distinct roles: scanning, coverage emission/checking, scoring, backlog/next selection, diffing, validation, and schema retrieval. Minor potential overlap exists between 'coverage_check' and 'validate' or 'backlog' and 'next', but descriptions clarify their contexts.

    Naming Consistency2/5

    Naming conventions are mixed: several tools use snake_case verb_noun forms ('coverage_emit', 'coverage_check', 'receipt_issue') while others are single words ('describe', 'scan', 'score', 'backlog', 'next', 'diff', 'validate', 'schema'). This inconsistency makes the API feel less cohesive.

    Tool Count4/5

    Eleven tools is slightly on the higher side for the apparent scope, but each serves a distinct purpose in the analysis workflow. A few could potentially be merged (e.g., 'next' is a filtered view of 'backlog'), but the count is still reasonable and not bloated.

    Completeness4/5

    The tool set covers the core workflow: scanning, coverage generation/validation, scoring, backlog management, diffing, artifact validation, and schema access. It lacks an explicit reporting or aggregation tool, but the existing functions seem sufficient for the stated read-only analysis domain.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessWithin a week

    Resources