Skip to main content
Glama
PyModel

claude-agy-mcp

by PyModel
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to claude-agy-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • agy-mcp

      Sh3rm
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      F
      maintenance
      This MCP server bridges Claude Code with the Antigravity CLI (agy), allowing Claude to delegate tasks to Google Gemini models via configurable difficulty tiers. It verifies the actual backend model for every call, provides separate tools for safe ask/research vs. shell exec, and supports long-running background jobs.
      27 npm
      MIT

    • subway-mcp-server

      MauricioPerera
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Local MCP server that exposes delegation tools for Codex, Claude, and Antigravity CLI, enabling an orchestrator agent to assign tasks to these sub-agents via non-interactive CLI commands.
      3
      MIT

    • antigravity-mcp

      k12club
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      An MCP server that lets Claude Code call the Google Antigravity CLI (agy) headlessly for a second opinion from a different model family, or to have agy read project files on Claude's behalf so large files never enter Claude's context window.
      17 npm
      MIT

    • agent-intern

      SinanTufekci
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      An MCP server that bridges Claude Code with Antigravity CLI using a Swarm Agent architecture to optimize local development workflows and minimize LLM token costs. Includes a web UI for monitoring agent workflows.
      24
      735 PyPI
      23
      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 9 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Most tools have distinct targets (status, model selection, file analysis, code search, web lookup, review, follow-up), and descriptions give clear 'use this when' guidance. However, the generic `delegate` overlaps conceptually with the specialized delegation wrappers (analyze_files, deep_search, web_lookup), so an agent must rely on the descriptions to route correctly.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    Names are mostly snake_case verb_noun or verb_phrase (analyze_files, deep_search, web_lookup, set_model, follow_up), which is readable and predictable. Minor deviations exist: `agy_status` uses an app prefix, `adversarial_review` is adjective_noun, and `delegate`/`delegate_many` differ in style.

    Tool Count5/5

    Nine tools is well-scoped for a delegation bridge: one status, one config, one follow-up, and a small set of specialized plus generic delegation entry points. Each tool earns its place without bloat.

    Completeness4/5

    The surface covers the core lifecycle: configure model, check status/quota, delegate to specialized contexts, review adversarially, and continue sessions. Minor gaps exist around session discovery/listing or cleanup, but agents can work around these via follow_up and agy_status.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources