redmine-local-mcp
Related Servers
Alternatives to redmine-local-mcp
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceA local Model Context Protocol server (stdio) for Redmine that allows you to work with Redmine issues, projects, and time entries directly from your editor.1272 npmMIT
- AlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceMCP server for Redmine project management, enabling tools for managing projects, issues, users, time entries, groups, memberships, versions, wiki, news, attachments, search, and Agile sprints via the Redmine REST API.897 npm1MIT
- AlicenseCqualityAmaintenanceModel Context Protocol (MCP) server for Redmine that provides comprehensive access to the Redmine REST API. It allows you to operate Redmine from MCP clients such as Claude Desktop.90405 npm27MIT
- AlicenseBqualityBmaintenanceMCP server that provides access to the Redmine REST API, enabling issue tracking, project management, and more through natural language.268 npmMIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceA read-only MCP server for querying Redmine issue data via the Redmine REST API, designed for seamless integration with AI assistants.7 npmMIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceA stateless MCP server for Redmine that allows users to interact with issues, time entries, wiki, projects, and more via their own API keys.4MIT
TDQS
Scored across 6 tools
Each tool targets a distinct resource and action: projects vs. issues, search vs. by-id, create vs. note. Even search_issues and get_my_issues are clearly differentiated by scope (all issues vs. assigned to the API user).
All tool names follow the consistent verb_noun pattern with lowercase and underscores: list_projects, search_issues, get_issue, get_my_issues, create_issue, add_issue_note. No mixed conventions or vague verbs.
Six tools is a well-scoped count for a Redmine MCP server, covering core read and write operations without superfluous entries. The set feels neither thin nor bloated.
The server covers project listing, issue search/retrieval, issue creation, and note addition, but lacks update and delete operations for issues. This is a notable gap for full lifecycle management, as agents cannot change status, assignee, or priority.