Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to @bldbl/mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      A lightweight build daemon that exposes project build flows as MCP tools, enabling AI assistants to drive builds, check status, and react to results.
      MIT
    • -
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      Not graded
      maintenance
      A Model Context Protocol server implementation for Autodesk Construction Cloud Build that enables AI assistants to manage construction issues, RFIs, submittals, photos, forms, and costs through natural language.
      -
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      A Model Context Protocol server that enables AI assistants like Claude to perform Python development tasks through file operations, code analysis, project management, and safe code execution.
      9
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      A Model Context Protocol server for intelligent task management in AI-powered development environments, providing file-based storage, dependency management with cycle detection, and an interactive CLI.
      14 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      A comprehensive Model Context Protocol toolkit that transforms AI assistants into autonomous agents capable of executing real-world tasks across filesystems, web requests, Git workflows, databases, system commands, and AI integrations.
      MIT

    TDQS

    C2/5.0

    Scored across 7 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    The tools have distinct purposes with minimal overlap: 'complete_task' and 'start_task' are clearly different lifecycle stages, while 'get_next_task', 'get_project_context', and 'update_progress' serve unique informational or update functions. However, 'create_discussion' might be ambiguous in relation to task management, as it could overlap with task-related communication.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern using snake_case, such as 'complete_task', 'create_discussion', and 'get_next_task'. This uniformity makes the tool set predictable and easy to understand, with no deviations in naming conventions.

    Tool Count5/5

    With 7 tools, the count is well-scoped for a task or project management server. It covers core operations like starting, completing, and tracking tasks, along with auxiliary functions like health checks and discussions, without being overly sparse or bloated.

    Completeness3/5

    The tool set covers basic task lifecycle (start, complete, progress update) and project context, but lacks obvious operations like listing tasks, updating task details, or deleting tasks. This creates minor gaps that agents might need to work around, though core workflows are partially supported.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessNo issues