Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to r-coding-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      C
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Provides read-only, source-attributed access to current CRAN and Bioconductor package metadata, dependencies, function documentation, vignettes, and version compatibility checks for AI assistants. It also enables retrieval of official Shiny, Quarto, Positron, and visualization docs alongside static analysis of R, ggplot2, and Quarto source code without executing it.
      32
      MIT
    • A
      license
      B
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables Claude to take a project from an empty folder to a published GitHub repository and npm, PyPI, or crates.io package. It automates preflight checks, scaffolding, quality checks, publishing, trusted-publishing setup, tagging, and release workflows, leaving only sign-in, 2FA, and approval clicks to the user.
      19
      44 npm
      2
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables Claude to fetch live package versions across npm, PyPI, crates.io, and Go modules, flag deprecations and known vulnerabilities, and audit dependency manifests with minimum safe upgrade versions.
      2
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables Claude to access and manage GitHub repositories dynamically at runtime, including private repos, with tools for browsing files, searching code, and viewing commits, pull requests, and issues.
      11
      1
      ISC
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Provides GitHub repository analysis tools for Claude, including repo summaries, commit history, issue tracking, contributor stats, and code quality assessment. Enables natural language queries about code quality, contributor activity, and repository comparisons.
      -

    TDQS

    A3.6/5.0

    Scored across 6 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool has a clearly distinct target: detect_workflow (identify type), validate_file vs validate_project (different scopes of validation), get_practice vs list_practices (single vs collection), and generate_template. No two tools could reasonably be confused for one another.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All six tools follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case convention (detect_workflow, validate_file, validate_project, get_practice, list_practices, generate_template). The pattern is predictable throughout with no deviations.

    Tool Count5/5

    Six tools is well-scoped for an R best-practices/validation server, with no redundancy. Each tool covers a distinct capability (detection, validation, practice lookup, template generation).

    Completeness4/5

    The surface covers the core lifecycle: detection, validation at file and project level, practice discovery, and template generation. Some gaps remain, such as auto-fix/remediation of findings, but the essential workflows are covered.

    Maintenance

    ActivityActive
    ResponsivenessSyncing