Skip to main content
Glama
SobieskiCodes

MCP-Claude Code Bridge

Related Servers

Alternatives to MCP-Claude Code Bridge

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • F
      license
      A
      quality
      Not graded
      maintenance
      Bridges Claude Desktop, Claude Code CLI, and Claude Code for VS Code, enabling developers to plan in Desktop, save specs to project directories, and invoke Claude Code CLI with seamless state sharing across interfaces.
      4
      -
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Connects Claude Desktop and Claude Code, enabling autonomous exchange of messages, files, and code while keeping their context windows separate.
      4
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Bridges Claude Code and OpenAI Codex CLI for an interactive plan-execute-review workflow, enabling Claude to interview, design, and review while Codex implements code changes.
      7
      291 npm
      3
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      An MCP server that bridges Claude Desktop with Claude Code, allowing users to delegate tasks to Claude Code directly from Claude Desktop conversations, supporting both synchronous and background execution with session reuse.
      2 npm
      MIT

    TDQS

    B3.1/5.0

    Scored across 5 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Most tools have distinct purposes: claude_code_task for coding execution, create_project for project setup, list_files and read_file for file inspection, and run_command for shell operations. However, claude_code_task and run_command could potentially overlap if coding tasks involve shell commands, but their descriptions help differentiate them.

    Naming Consistency3/5

    The naming is mixed: claude_code_task uses a descriptive compound name, while the others follow a verb_noun pattern (create_project, list_files, read_file, run_command). This inconsistency is noticeable but still readable, as most tools use clear verbs and nouns.

    Tool Count4/5

    With 5 tools, the count is reasonable for a code bridge server, covering project creation, file operations, and command execution. It feels slightly thin for broader coding workflows, but each tool serves a clear purpose without obvious bloat.

    Completeness3/5

    The toolset covers basic project and file operations, but there are notable gaps for a code-focused domain: no tools for writing/modifying files, deleting files, or managing dependencies. This could limit agent workflows, though core inspection and execution are present.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessNo issues