A
licenseNot graded
qualityD
maintenanceMCP bridge for calling local coding-agent CLIs (Codex, Claude) from another agent, enabling bounded tasks like code review, verification, and bug hunting.
MIT
Codex Delegate MCP
Related Servers
Alternatives to Codex Delegate MCP
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceBridges Claude Code and OpenAI Codex through MCP, allowing cross-harness querying, code review, explanation, and implementation delegation.64 npm1MIT
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceAn MCP server that splits coding work between ChatGPT web (planning, review) and Codex CLI (implementation), enabling agentic workflows over a local repo with risk-gated execution and safety rails.23MIT
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceLocal-first multi-agent delegation and approval control for Codex via MCP, with persistent task DAG, isolated worktrees, and a web console.141MIT
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceA 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.111MIT
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceBridges multiple CLI coding agents (Codex, Cursor, OpenCode, Claude, Antigravity) into any MCP client, enabling delegation of prompts, parallel execution, and code review workflows.689 npmMozilla Public 2.0
TDQS
A4/5.0
Scored across 3 tools
Disambiguation5/5
The three tools map to clearly distinct purposes: delegate starts a Codex run, cancel terminates active runs, and doctor diagnoses environment/plugin health. There is no realistic chance of selecting the wrong one for a given intent.
Naming Consistency4/5
All three names are single lowercase imperative verbs (delegate, cancel, doctor), which is a consistent, predictable style. There's no verb_noun structure, but the convention is uniform enough to be readable.
Tool Count4/5
Three tools fit a deliberately narrow delegation-focused server, with each tool earning its place (start, stop, diagnose). It is slightly thin and leaves no room for status/inspection, but is reasonable for the stated scope.
Completeness3/5
The surface covers starting, cancelling, and diagnosing runs, but there is no explicit status or list-runs tool even though delegate's description tells agents to 'check status before trusting result'. This leaves a notable gap for inspecting or enumerating runs.
Maintenance
ActivityActive
ResponsivenessNo issues