Skip to main content
Glama
antideploy-mcp

antideploy-mcp

Official
by antideploy

Related Servers

Alternatives to antideploy-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to deploy code to any hosting provider by creating PRs, building, and verifying health checks, all from a single natural language command.
      62 npm
      1
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI coding agents to deploy and manage full multi-service applications on Constructor from a single request, covering image builds, service configuration, start/stop lifecycle, logs, and file syncing on research desks. It handles browser-based sign-in and token renewal automatically so agents can inspect deployments and report results without manual setup.
      14
      478 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables AI coding agents to check repository deploy readiness, deploy apps to your own cloud (AWS, Google Cloud, Azure, DigitalOcean), and migrate apps from platforms like Heroku, Railway, Render, or Vercel with rollback.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables deployment and management of applications on the Citizen platform from git repositories or local files. It allows AI assistants to monitor deployment logs, handle authentication, and automatically fix build errors using intelligent error analysis.
      11
      14 npm
      MIT

    TDQS

    B3.4/5.0

    Scored across 48 tools

    Disambiguation3/5

    Most tools target a distinct resource+action and the descriptions are unusually explicit about when to pick each one (e.g. logs vs metrics vs health). However, there are real confusable clusters: deploy vs redeploy, set_env vs set_env_from_file, and especially email_status vs email_deliverability vs email_overview vs email_activity, where 'is email working?' could plausibly hit three or four tools. Descriptions mitigate but do not eliminate the overlap.

    Naming Consistency3/5

    Names are snake_case and grouped by a readable resource prefix, but the verb position is inconsistent: verb-first (create_application, remove_env, add_schedule, create_ai_key) mixed with resource-first (database_create, storage_create, auth_create, email_create, email_pause, email_remove). There are also bare-noun tools (app_settings, database_info, deployment_history, logs, health, metrics) and single-word verbs (deploy, login, rollback), so the pattern is predictable only within a sub-cluster.

    Tool Count2/5

    48 tools is heavy even for a broad platform surface, and several groups look consolidatable: eleven email_* tools, four near-identical *_env_to_file tools, and separate *_create / *_env_to_file pairs for database, storage, auth and email. The domain justifies many tools, but this count pushes well past the point where an agent can scan the surface comfortably.

    Completeness4/5

    Coverage is strong across the lifecycle: application create/link/list, deploy/redeploy/rollback/status/history, env list/set/set-from-file/remove, schedules list/add/enable/remove, plus one-shot provisioning and status for database, storage, auth, email, AI keys and security scans. Minor gaps: no delete/remove for the application itself, no update_schedule (must remove and re-add, as the description admits), and no standalone info/status for storage or auth comparable to database_info.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessLimited data