Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to archprint

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Exposes four low-token tools — map, place, check, and plan — that let any coding agent read a codebase's declared systems, boundaries, and allowed dependency routes before it writes code. Agents can look up where a file belongs and what it may import, see whether their uncommitted edits crossed a boundary, and declare new dependencies up front so violations surface on the map, in the PR, and mid-turn instead of in review.
      1,129 npm
      5
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Framework-agnostic architecture-rule enforcement for AI agents: analyzes Python codebases import graphs against declarative rulesets to report layer, forbidden-import, and cycle violations with file and line numbers. Supports MCP, OpenAI, Anthropic, LangChain, LlamaIndex, and CLI integrations.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Indexes any TypeScript / React / Next.js repo into a queryable code graph and exposes 13 MCP tools — who-renders, who-calls, find-references, blast-radius, find-cycles, dead-code orphans, and local semantic search — so agents query structure instead of reading whole files. Built on ts-morph, so edges are resolved, not grepped.
      14
      2
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Gives your AI coding agent a bounded map of an unfamiliar TypeScript SaaS repo: where the code lives, what's risky to touch, and where the money / auth / user flows are. Provides eight MCP tools for orientation, task focus, risk assessment, and SaaS-specific observations without AST or type checking.
      14 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Analyzes codebases to generate dependency graphs and architectural insights across multiple programming languages, helping developers understand code structure and validate against architectural rules.
      6
      39 npm
      20
      MIT

    TDQS

    A4.2/5.0

    Scored across 3 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: scan lists existing rules with evidence, recommend suggests a rule set, and explain drills into one rule from scan. There is no overlap in outputs or actions, and the descriptions make the boundaries explicit.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tool names follow the same archprint_<verb> snake_case pattern with clear, consistent verbs (scan, recommend, explain). No deviations or mixed conventions.

    Tool Count5/5

    Three tools are well-scoped for a read-only architecture analysis server, covering discovery, recommendation, and explanation without redundancy. Each tool earns its place and the set is not thin.

    Completeness4/5

    The surface covers listing existing rules, recommending a rule set, and explaining a single rule in detail, which is complete for a read-only advisor. A minor gap is the absence of a tool to export or apply rules, but that may be intentionally out of scope.

    Maintenance

    ActivityActive
    ResponsivenessNo issues