Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Adaptive Tech Radar MCP

Adaptive Tech Radar MCP

by SerhiiHirus
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to Adaptive Tech Radar MCP

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • pkg-health-mcp

      actions-marketplace-validations
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents and developers to score npm packages, PyPI packages, and GitHub repositories for maintenance health, producing A–F grades, per-signal details, and plain-language risk lists before adoption. It supports checking individual packages, scanning manifests or lock files for transitive dependencies, and comparing alternatives.
      3
      73 npm
      Apache 2.0
    • Metsuke

      Metsukeofficial

      plenoai
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      F
      maintenance
      Provides SDLC compliance verification as tools that AI agents can invoke, continuously monitoring and evaluating development processes.
      MIT

    • aftertaste

      WiseeCarrot
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables AI coding agents to scan projects or changed files for risky leftovers like hallucinated packages, exposed secrets, truncated code, and unfinished stubs, and to verify that packages exist before installing them.
      27 npm
      MIT

    • pkgtruth

      hxckya
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables AI coding agents and CI to vet npm dependencies before they reach the lockfile, flagging hallucinated, slopsquatted, or otherwise risky packages with evidence-backed verdicts.
      3
      101 npm
      4
      MIT
    Deploy Server
    Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

    TDQS

    A3.7/5.0

    Scored across 5 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool has a clearly distinct role in the workflow: profile setting, update fetching/scoring, Context7 verification prep, feedback recording, and manual ingestion. There is no overlap between tools, and the descriptions make the boundaries explicit. An agent can easily select the correct tool for each step.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tools use a consistent 'radar_' prefix followed by a verb_noun or verb_noun_noun pattern (check_updates, record_feedback, set_stack_profile, etc.). The convention is predictable and readable throughout. No mixing of camelCase or inconsistent verb styles.

    Tool Count5/5

    With five tools, the server is well-scoped for a tech radar workflow. Each tool earns its place, covering the essential actions without bloat. The count aligns with a focused recommendation and feedback loop.

    Completeness4/5

    The surface covers the core lifecycle: profile setup, update retrieval and scoring, external verification prep, feedback recording, and custom ingestion. Minor gaps exist, such as no explicit tool to view the current profile or inspect learned memory, but these are likely not critical for the main workflow. The set enables end-to-end operation with small workarounds.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessSyncing

    Resources