Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to canban-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      B
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to manage kanban boards with tasks, including creating boards, items, moving between columns, and searching.
      8
      1
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to manage Kanban tasks, boards, teams, and checklists via natural language, with full CRUD operations and live updates.
      78 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to create, update, list, and delete tasks on a Kanban board via the Model Context Protocol, supporting multi-project management and real-time collaboration.
      105
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to work a self-hosted kanban board as first-class users, exposing eleven kanban_* tools over a stateless Streamable HTTP endpoint for listing projects, stages, members and custom fields, and for creating, updating, moving and deleting tasks. Authenticates with bearer-token scopes so read-only or write access can be granted per agent, with every mutation audited.
      4
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables coding agents to read and write a local kanban board, adding and editing cards, moving them between columns, managing projects, and writing update entries so their work is visible in real time.
      3 npm
      1
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to work a Noeto kanban board: browse boards and cards, search across them, create and update cards, move and reorder them between columns, comment, and read or write documents and attachments on cards. It runs as a local process for Claude Code and Claude Desktop and deliberately avoids destructive actions such as deleting human-created content.
      MIT

    TDQS

    A3.5/5.0

    Scored across 11 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Each tool maps to a distinct resource+action (identity, projects, board, task CRUD, lane create/rename, people), and get_board vs get_task is explicitly clarified by the note that bodies are omitted. Minor residual overlap between get_board and get_task is the only soft spot.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Consistent verb_noun snake_case throughout (list_projects, get_task, create_task, update_task, move_task, delete_task, create_lane, rename_lane, list_people), with whoami the only conventional exception and it is idiomatic.

    Tool Count5/5

    11 tools is well within the sweet spot and every tool corresponds to a concrete board operation; nothing feels padded or missing at the count level.

    Completeness4/5

    Task lifecycle is fully covered (create/get/update/move/delete) plus board reads, lane creation/renaming, and people listing. Gaps: no delete_lane or lane reordering, and no project creation, which could be a dead end for cleanup or lane restructuring.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues