Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to PyProject Doctor

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables MCP clients to run deterministic, read-only local repository audits for risky GitHub workflows, undocumented environment variables, possible credentials, and conflicting dependency configuration, returning structured findings without sending source code to a service.
      50 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Lets an MCP client triage a local project for leaked secrets, missing Supabase row-level security, unauthenticated data-changing API routes, insecure browser-exposed environment variables, and other common web-app security mistakes without network access. It returns severity-ordered findings or a plain-English go/no-go summary with what to fix first.
      2
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables AI coding agents and MCP clients to run a read-only environment check against a project's declared requirements and receive structured results identifying exactly what needs fixing.
      377 PyPI
      3
      MIT
    • A
      license
      B
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables running Prospector static analysis on Python files or directories via MCP, returning structured results with severity, location, and rule codes.
      2
      GPL 3.0
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables agents to review Python dependency requirements and source code against a modernization catalog, returning structured guidance, import-level suggestions, and compatibility floors. It also lists available codemod recipes and previews their transformations as unified diffs, all read-only and without installing packages or executing supplied code.
      MIT

    TDQS

    C2.7/5.0

    Scored across 3 tools

    Disambiguation2/5

    analyze and ruff_check substantially overlap: analyze explicitly includes running Ruff lint and formatting checks, while ruff_check does the same thing more specifically. inspect is distinct, but agents may struggle to know when to use analyze versus ruff_check.

    Naming Consistency3/5

    The set mixes generic verbs (analyze, inspect) with a tool-prefixed operation (ruff_check). It is readable, but there is no consistent verb_noun or noun_verb convention across all three tools.

    Tool Count4/5

    Three tools is a reasonable scope for a focused project-diagnosis server. The count is not excessive, though one tool appears redundant with another rather than earning a clearly separate place.

    Completeness3/5

    The surface covers environment inspection and Ruff checks, but a project doctor typically would also expose configuration validation, dependency/environment health checks, or remediation/fix operations. The current set is diagnostic-heavy with notable lifecycle gaps.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessOutdated data