Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to codecity-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      An MCP server that gives Claude structural understanding of a codebase—dependency graph, entry points, complexity ranking, and import cycles—without reading every file into context.
      4
      MIT
    • A
      license
      B
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Codebase Q&A agent with git-history awareness. Explore a repo with list_files, read_file, and search, plus git log, blame, and diff and a repo map to answer "why did this change?" questions. Runs locally as an MCP server for Claude Code and other MCP clients.
      11
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      A local, SQLite-backed code index for Claude Code, exposed over MCP, enabling targeted code retrieval without external APIs.
      109 PyPI
      1
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      An MCP server that indexes local code repositories, extracting symbols and call graphs to give Claude precise, structural answers with real file paths and line numbers. Runs entirely locally with no network requests, for privacy-focused code understanding.
      2,221 npm
      MIT
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables natural language analysis of local software repositories, providing insights into project structure, technologies, code, tests, and Git history through MCP tools.
      -

    TDQS

    A4.2/5.0

    Scored across 4 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool addresses a distinct aspect of codebase analysis: structure, file summaries, dependency graph, and complexity hotspots. There is no overlap in their purposes, making selection unambiguous.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tool names follow a consistent get_<noun> pattern, with clear resource names (repo_structure, file_summary, dependency_graph, complexity_hotspots). The naming is uniform and predictable.

    Tool Count5/5

    With 4 tools, the set is well-scoped for a code analysis server. Each tool covers a core need and none are redundant, making the count appropriate.

    Completeness4/5

    The server covers the main exploration workflows: orienting via structure, inspecting files via summaries, understanding dependencies, and identifying complex areas. Missing full file content retrieval is a minor gap since summaries include excerpts.

    Maintenance

    ActivitySlowing
    ResponsivenessNo issues