A
licenseA
qualityC
maintenanceEnables coding agents to run persistent, budgeted work sessions with dependency graphs, human decision queues, required validation, and clean handoffs for autonomous or human-in-the-loop execution.
16
MIT
shipfast-mcp
by QuocTang
Related Servers
Alternatives to shipfast-mcp
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceEnables AI coding providers to run structured multi-agent workflows with specs, tracked tasks, handoffs, health gates, and audited repair mode.29 npmMIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceEnables AI coding providers to run structured multi-agent workflows with shared use-case and spec documents, tracked tasks, handoffs, health checks, and review/repair gates.29 npmMIT
- AlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceOrchestrates complete agile development workflows from product requirements to QA testing through role-based stages (PO → Architect → SM → Dev → Review → QA). Manages workflow state, generates role-specific prompts, and saves artifacts while integrating with multiple AI engines for comprehensive project delivery.111 npm19MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables autonomous agents to manage tasks in a pull-based work queue with strategic goal alignment, real-time monitoring, and cross-project choreography.MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceEnables AI coding providers to run structured multi-agent workflows with use cases, specifications, tracked tasks, handoffs, and health-gated completion.-
TDQS
B3.4/5.0
Scored across 10 tools
Disambiguation4/5
Most tools target distinct lifecycle actions: scaffold vs upgrade, status vs check, and create_department vs refresh_departments are separable given their descriptions. The main overlap risk is between status (read state) and check (validate integrity), and among the several record-creation tools, but descriptions clarify boundaries enough.
Naming Consistency3/5
The set is mostly snake_case, but it mixes bare single-word names (upgrade, status, check) with verb_noun names (scaffold_project, open_wave, read_guide) and uses different creation verbs (new_decision, create_department, open_wave). It remains readable, but the pattern is not predictable.
Tool Count5/5
10 tools is well within a healthy range for managing a project framework lifecycle. Each tool appears to earn its place, covering setup, upgrade, status, code allocation, waves, decisions, departments, validation, and guidance.
Completeness3/5
The surface covers scaffolding, upgrading, inspecting, and several record-creation workflows, but there are notable gaps around the wave and backlog lifecycle: open_wave exists without a close/update wave operation, and next_code allocates codes without a clear tool to create backlog items. Department management also lacks removal or update beyond refresh.
Maintenance
ActivityMaintained
ResponsivenessNo recent community issues