github-binary-mcp
Related Servers
Alternatives to github-binary-mcp
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceEnables any MCP client to read GitHub repositories, branches, tags, pull requests, files and Actions workflow runs, and optionally create branches and pull requests, comment, assign, approve, trigger workflows, merge and delete. Read-only by default, with separate opt-in switches for write and destructive operations, working against github.com or GitHub Enterprise Server.11MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables managing GitHub repositories, files, and user information through MCP, with support for creating, updating, and deleting repository contents, as well as fetching user profiles.1-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables self-hosted, read-only remote interaction with GitHub repositories, allowing listing repositories, searching code, and inspecting commits, pull requests, issues, and diffs via authenticated MCP clients.221 npmMIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables users to read and manage GitHub repositories through MCP, with destructive operations gated behind explicit confirmation and dry-run previews.1-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables secure GitHub App authenticated Git operations and GitHub API workflows through MCP, using ephemeral containers and a private key broker to protect credentials.73 npmMIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables read-only browsing and querying of GitHub repositories, including listing repos, reading files, fetching READMEs, searching code, and viewing commit history via MCP.-
TDQS
Scored across 4 tools
Each tool targets a distinct action (push single, push batch, read, delete) and the descriptions clearly separate the single-file path (verbatim base64) from the multi-file commit path. The only mild overlap is push_binary_file vs push_binary_files, since a single file could plausibly go through either, but the cardinality and API mechanism differences are stated explicitly.
All four names are snake_case verb_noun and follow the same shape (push_binary_file(s), get_binary_file, delete_file). The only deviation is that delete_file and get_binary_file drop the 'push_' prefix while delete_file also omits 'binary', but the pattern remains predictable and readable.
Four tools is a tight, purposeful surface for a narrowly scoped binary-file server, and each one maps to a real operation. The single vs batch push pair is arguably a slight over-split of one capability, keeping it just under a perfect score.
Create/overwrite, read, and delete are covered, but there is no listing or path-discovery tool, so an agent must already know exact repo paths. GitHub's content API also requires a blob SHA to delete or update an existing file, and nothing states that get_binary_file returns one, leaving a likely dead end for delete/overwrite workflows.