Skip to main content
Glama
LinHaiJ

workbuddy-mcp

by LinHaiJ
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to workbuddy-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • all-agents-mcp

      Dokkabei97
      A
      license
      B
      quality
      F
      maintenance
      Enables orchestrating multiple AI CLI agents (Claude Code, Codex, Gemini CLI, Copilot CLI) through a unified MCP interface for task delegation, cross-agent comparison, and specialized tools like code review and debugging.
      14
      3 npm
      14
      MIT

    • local-model

      alkrcaaa
      F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables MCP clients like Claude Code to delegate coding tasks to a local model through a configurable coding-agent CLI backed by any OpenAI-compatible endpoint, with tools for health checks, task execution, and context-aware file modifications.
      -

    • Sub-Agents MCP

      prefrontal-systems
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables the creation and execution of task-specific AI sub-agents defined in markdown across any MCP-compatible tool like Cursor or Claude Desktop. It integrates with execution engines such as Claude Code, Cursor CLI, and Gemini CLI to provide portable and reusable specialized agent workflows.
      1
      110 npm
      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

    A3.9/5.0

    Scored across 1 tool

    Disambiguation5/5

    With only one tool, there is no possibility of overlapping purposes. The single action is clearly scoped to running a WorkBuddy task and cannot be confused with anything else.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    The tool name follows a clear verb_noun convention: run_workbuddy_task. It accurately describes the action and is easily predictable.

    Tool Count3/5

    A single tool is functional but feels thin for a server, even though it directly covers its stated purpose. There is no secondary surface for configuration, status, or task management, placing it at the borderline of acceptable scope.

    Completeness4/5

    The server covers its core workflow: executing a non-interactive WorkBuddy task and returning result text. It lacks lifecycle or management operations, but for a one-shot CLI delegation tool these are not necessarily required, so only minor gaps exist.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources