Skip to main content
Glama
WebisityStudio

claude-codex-mcp-bridge

by WebisityStudio
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to claude-codex-mcp-bridge

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • harness-bridge

      rbutera
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Bridges Claude Code and OpenAI Codex through MCP, allowing cross-harness querying, code review, explanation, and implementation delegation.
      6
      4 npm
      1
      MIT

    • Claude Codex Computer Use

      songkeys
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      An unofficial bridge that lets Claude Code control local macOS applications through an existing OpenAI Computer Use installation by launching the signed Codex client and translating MCP compatibility.
      24 npm
      7
      MIT

    • Herald

      kOlapsis
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      F
      maintenance
      The self-hosted MCP bridge between Claude Chat and Claude Code.
      46
      AGPL 3.0

    • agent-talk

      YanZiBin
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      A local MCP bridge that connects existing Codex and Claude Code conversations with DSH Web, enabling delegation, result retrieval, and human-in-the-loop coordination without leaving native chat apps.
      11
      1
      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

    A3.8/5.0

    Scored across 17 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Most tools target distinct resources or lifecycle stages: messaging, agent registration, wake receipts, and Codex orchestration are clearly separated. The main ambiguity is between ask_codex and bridge_orchestrate_codex, both of which start a saved Codex worker in a worktree; descriptions try to distinguish simple use from orchestration, but an agent could still misselect.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    The set is predominantly snake_case with a bridge_ prefix, which is predictable for the coordination tools. Two Codex-facing tools (ask_codex, review_with_codex) omit the bridge_ prefix, and bridge_orchestrate_codex versus bridge_orchestration_status/wait uses slightly different forms, but the pattern is still largely readable.

    Tool Count4/5

    At 17 tools, the server is slightly above the typical 3-15 range, but the count is justified by two subdomains: agent messaging/coordination and Codex task orchestration. Each tool appears to cover a distinct operation rather than duplicating another, so it does not feel bloated.

    Completeness4/5

    The surface covers the core lifecycle: agent registration/retirement, sending and reading messages, acknowledgement, threading, wake status, session inspection, and Codex task/review/orchestration flow. Minor gaps remain, such as an explicit cancel/stop for a running Codex run or a way to list active runs directly, but agents can work around these.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources