Skip to main content
Glama
Zythenth

Antigravity MCP Bridge

by Zythenth
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to Antigravity MCP Bridge

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • antigravity-plugin-codex

      irrumi
      A
      license
      B
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables a local Codex chat to ask a second opinion, review staged, unstaged, or revision-based diffs, and delegate coding tasks to the Antigravity CLI running in isolated or disposable workspaces. Supports starting, polling, retrieving, and cancelling tasks with returned answers, diffs, changed-file lists, exit codes, and time/output limits, while never auto-applying returned patches.
      8
      1
      MIT

    • sub-antigravity

      ZorIgn
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables AI harnesses to delegate code analysis, modification, testing, and long-running tasks to the locally installed Antigravity CLI via stdio MCP, with job status tracking and conversation continuity.
      3
      MIT

    • Antigravity MCP Bridge

      Daniiislo
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables Codex or Claude Code to orchestrate persistent Antigravity CLI workers as independent implementers and testers within restricted workspace roots. It supports asynchronous task dispatch, progress polling, result inspection, follow-up messages, and cancellation with bounded, audited local event logging.
      150 npm
      1
      MIT
    Deploy Server
    One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

    TDQS

    B3.4/5.0

    Scored across 23 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Tools generally target distinct lifecycle stages (run/resume/cancel, preview/read_patch/read_result, test/verify/integrate), but several reading/status tools have adjacent purposes. The descriptions help separate result vs read_result and preview vs read_patch, though an agent could still confuse them.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    All tools consistently use the antigravity_ prefix with snake_case, which makes the set predictable. Most names are verb_noun or verb_noun-phrase, but some are noun-only query tools (usage, status, tasks, events, result, sessions), a minor deviation from a strict pattern.

    Tool Count3/5

    23 tools is heavy for a single MCP server and sits in the borderline 16-25 range. The domain is complex, but several output-reading and status tools could be consolidated, making the surface feel somewhat over-scoped.

    Completeness4/5

    The surface covers model selection, task lifecycle, file listing, patch/result reading, testing, verification, integration, and cleanup. Minor gaps exist, such as no explicit authentication/login tool or direct source-file read outside task artifacts, but core workflows are covered.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources