F
licenseA
qualityD
maintenanceAn MCP server implementing a 7-stage agentic frontend workflow—from design audit to PR review—including AI-driven component generation, browser validation, E2E testing, and CI self-healing.
4
4 npm
-
mcp-review
Officialby apatureai
Related Servers
Alternatives to mcp-review
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceMCP server that exposes web page annotations to AI coding agents, enabling automated implementation of visual feedback and design tweaks.4 npm163-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceMCP server that provides AI coding agents with real-time visual access to web apps, enabling them to see screens, run accessibility and layout inspections, and interact with pages through a shared live panel.1,134 npm127MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceMCP server for visual feedback, video direction, and QA assertions on web pages, enabling AI agents to read, reply, and resolve annotations in real time.6MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceSelf-hosted design audit MCP server that reviews UI code against Nielsen's heuristics and an accessibility rubric, returning scores and fixable findings. It also enables verifying previously flagged issues against updated code.33 npmBSD 4-Clause "Original" or "Old"
squirrelscanofficial
AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceMCP server for website QA auditing, covering SEO, performance, security, accessibility, and agent experience with 260+ rules and AI-optimized output for coding agents.267MIT
TDQS
A3.9/5.0
Scored across 5 tools
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: submit review, get status, recheck, cancel, and panel action. There is no overlap between submission and retrieval, and cancellation is separate from panel actions. The descriptions further differentiate them, making misselection unlikely.
Naming Consistency4/5
All tools share the 'design_' prefix, but the suffix varies: 'review', 'review_get', 'recheck', 'review_cancel', 'review_panel_action'. While 'design_review' is a verb phrase, others combine 'review' with a noun (get, cancel) and 'recheck' is a different verb. The pattern is mostly consistent and readable, but not perfectly uniform.
Tool Count5/5
Five tools is well within the recommended 3-15 range and matches the scope of a review service. Each tool covers a distinct operation in the review lifecycle without redundancy or bloat.
Completeness4/5
The surface covers the core lifecycle: submit, poll/retrieve, recheck, and cancel, plus an interactive panel action for post-review interactions. Minor gaps like listing all past reviews are not essential for the primary workflow, and the tool set is adequate for its stated purpose.
Maintenance
ActivityActive
ResponsivenessUnresponsive