Skip to main content
Glama
RaedBerjaoui

Vibecoders MCP

by RaedBerjaoui
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to Vibecoders MCP

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • CHARLIE

      T3CCH
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Unified knowledge management and agent orchestration MCP server for Claude Code that remembers project patterns, assigns specialist agents, loads relevant knowledge into prompts, and tracks work across sessions to save time and reduce costs.
      1
      GPL 3.0

    • Toolport

      btsouth
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      One local gateway for all your MCP servers — shared by every AI coding tool (Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex). Set up each server once; keys stay in the OS keychain; lazy discovery keeps agent context small. Local-first, open source.
      4
      41 npm
      214
      MIT

    • llm-cli-gateway

      verivus-oss
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      A Model Context Protocol (MCP) gateway for running Claude Code, Codex, Gemini, Grok, and Mistral (Vibe) CLIs from one MCP endpoint, with durable async jobs, session continuity, cache-aware prompting, observability, and personal-appliance setup tooling. Why developers try it: one local MCP endpoint for cross-LLM validation, multi-agent coding workflows.
      65
      262 npm
      16
      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

    A3.6/5.0

    Scored across 23 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Tools are grouped by domain and mostly have distinct purposes. The only potential confusion is between recall_handoff and project_context (which includes the saved handoff) and among the three reference_* tools, but descriptions clarify when each should be used.

    Naming Consistency2/5

    Naming mixes conventions: verb_noun (generate_image, search_tools, call_tool, write_handoff, recall_handoff, load_tool, list_providers) and noun-first (memory_store, reference_inspect, tasks_list, design_core). This is especially inconsistent with parallel operations like list_providers vs tasks_list.

    Tool Count4/5

    23 tools is on the heavier side, but the server covers a broad scope (delegation, memory, references, design, web search, image generation, and MCP management). The count is justified, though some consolidation (e.g., reference_* tools) could streamline it.

    Completeness4/5

    The tool surface offers complete lifecycle coverage for key domains: memory (store/recall/walk/forget), delegation (delegate/list/steer/interrupt), and references (inspect/excerpt/read source). Minor gaps exist (no explicit handoff clear, no provider config tool), but they are workaroundable.

    Maintenance

    ActivityStale
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources