Skip to main content
Glama
cexll

Codex MCP Server

by cexll
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to Codex MCP Server

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • codex-mcp-server

      tuannvm
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Bridges Claude and OpenAI's Codex CLI for AI-powered code analysis, generation, and review, with support for session management, web search, and structured output.
      6
      1,265 npm
      647
      ISC

    • Claude Code Bridge

      Cyruskraad
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Lets Codex delegate coding and repository work to an installed Claude Code CLI with permission-aware inspect/write access, model and effort selection, resumable and cloud-attached sessions, and durable synchronous or asynchronous jobs.
      MIT

    • codex-bridge-mcp

      WeiqiZhou2002
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables two-way collaboration between Claude Code and the Codex CLI: Claude can hand off plans for execution or adversarial review, while the working agent can block to ask Claude questions, report progress or findings, and receive mid-run corrections. Supports multiple named, resumable sessions per project with configurable model, effort, and sandbox settings.
      20 npm
      MIT

    • codex-mcp

      anhnguyen0905
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Bridges Claude Code and OpenAI Codex CLI for an interactive plan-execute-review workflow, enabling Claude to interview, design, and review while Codex implements code changes.
      7
      50 npm
      3
      MIT

    • Codex Bridge

      eLyiN
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables AI coding assistants to interact with OpenAI's Codex AI through the official CLI. Provides direct integration for code analysis, file review, and batch processing with zero API costs.
      3
      120
      MIT
    Deploy Server
    Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

    TDQS

    C2.7/5.0

    Scored across 8 tools

    Disambiguation3/5

    Most tools have distinct purposes, but there is some overlap and ambiguity. For example, 'ask-codex' and 'batch-codex' both involve executing Codex CLI operations, which could cause confusion about when to use each. However, descriptions help clarify that 'batch-codex' is for multiple tasks, while 'ask-codex' is more general. Tools like 'brainstorm' and 'fetch-chunk' are clearly distinct, but the set includes basic utilities like 'ping' and 'Help' that don't align well with the code-focused domain.

    Naming Consistency2/5

    Naming conventions are inconsistent and chaotic with no discernible pattern. There is a mix of styles: 'ask-codex' and 'batch-codex' use hyphenated names, 'brainstorm' and 'fetch-chunk' are single words or hyphenated, 'Help' starts with a capital letter, and 'ping', 'timeout-test', and 'version' use different formats. This lack of consistency makes the tool set harder to navigate and predict.

    Tool Count3/5

    With 8 tools, the count is borderline but reasonable for the apparent scope of a Codex MCP server. However, the inclusion of basic utilities like 'ping', 'Help', and 'timeout-test' alongside core code tools feels slightly over-scoped, as these utilities don't directly contribute to the main purpose. It's not extreme, but the mix reduces focus.

    Completeness3/5

    The tool surface has notable gaps in coverage for the Codex domain. Core operations like code execution and batch processing are covered by 'ask-codex' and 'batch-codex', but there are missing operations such as code review, error handling, or integration with version control. Tools like 'brainstorm' and 'fetch-chunk' add niche functions, but the set lacks a cohesive lifecycle for code tasks, which could lead to agent workarounds.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessResponsive

    Resources