Skip to main content
Glama
Code Review MCP Server

Code Review MCP Server

Code Review MCP Server

AI-powered code review MCP server for automated pull request analysis.

Features

  • Code Review: Automated PR review with actionable feedback

  • Security Analysis: Identify security vulnerabilities in code

  • Improvement Suggestions: Get code quality improvement recommendations

  • MCP Compatible: Works with any MCP client (Claude, Cursor, etc.)

Related MCP server: code-review-mcp-server

Installation

npm install -g code-review-mcp

Setup

  1. Set your OpenAI API key:

export OPENAI_API_KEY="your-api-key-here"
  1. Configure in your MCP client:

Claude Desktop

Add to claude_desktop_config.json:

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "code-review": {
      "command": "node",
      "args": ["/path/to/code-review-mcp/index.js"],
      "env": {
        "OPENAI_API_KEY": "your-api-key-here"
      }
    }
  }
}

Cursor

Add to .cursor/mcp.json:

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "code-review": {
      "command": "node",
      "args": ["/path/to/code-review-mcp/index.js"],
      "env": {
        "OPENAI_API_KEY": "your-api-key-here"
      }
    }
  }
}

Available Tools

1. review_code

Review code changes and provide feedback.

Parameters:

  • diff (required): The code diff to review

  • context (optional): Additional context about the changes

Example:

{
  "diff": "--- a/file.js\n+++ b/file.js\n@@ -1,3 +1,5 @@\n+// New function\n+function add(a, b) {\n+  return a + b;\n+}",
  "context": "Added new utility function for arithmetic operations"
}

2. analyze_security

Analyze code for security vulnerabilities.

Parameters:

  • code (required): The code to analyze

  • language (optional): Programming language

Example:

{
  "code": "const query = `SELECT * FROM users WHERE id = ${userId}`;",
  "language": "javascript"
}

3. suggest_improvements

Suggest code quality improvements.

Parameters:

  • code (required): The code to analyze

  • focus (optional): Focus area (performance, readability, best_practices, all)

Example:

{
  "code": "function processData(data) { return data.filter(x => x).map(x => x * 2); }",
  "focus": "performance"
}

Usage with AI Agents

This MCP server can be used by AI agents to automatically review code:

// Example: AI agent using the MCP server
const review = await mcpClient.callTool({
  name: "review_code",
  arguments: {
    diff: prDiff,
    context: "Feature: user authentication"
  }
});

console.log(review.content[0].text);

Enterprise Features

For enterprise use cases, contact us for:

  • Custom review rules and guidelines

  • Integration with CI/CD pipelines

  • Team-specific coding standards

  • Priority support

  • On-premise deployment

License

MIT

Author

ContentForge Press

Support

CLI mode (CI-friendly)

Run a one-shot review without an MCP client:

# Review a diff file
reviewpilot-mcp --review pr.diff

# With context
reviewpilot-mcp --review pr.diff --context "PR #123: auth feature"

# Security scan a source file
reviewpilot-mcp --security src/app.js --language javascript

GitHub Actions automatic PR review

Copy examples/github-action/reviewpilot.yml to .github/workflows/. Every PR gets an automated review comment.

Configuration

Variable

Required

Default

Purpose

OPENAI_API_KEY

yes

—

API key

OPENAI_BASE_URL

no

OpenAI

Any OpenAI-compatible endpoint (gateways, local servers)

REVIEW_MODEL

no

gpt-4o-mini

Model used for review

Use a local or cheaper model by pointing OPENAI_BASE_URL and REVIEW_MODEL at an OpenAI-compatible server.

Available Tools

3 tools
analyze_securityC

Analyze code for security vulnerabilities

Inputs: code (required), language.

review_codeC

Review code changes and provide feedback

Inputs: diff (required), context.

suggest_improvementsC

Suggest code quality improvements

Inputs: code (required), focus.

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Loading tool schema changelog…

    TDQS

    B3/5.0

    Scored across 3 tools

    Disambiguation3/5

    review_code is broad and overlaps with suggest_improvements (both provide code quality feedback) and partially with analyze_security. The descriptions help but do not fully draw clear boundaries between general review and targeted analysis.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All three tools follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern: review_code, analyze_security, suggest_improvements. The convention is predictable and readable.

    Tool Count4/5

    Three tools is reasonable for a focused code-review server, with each targeting a distinct analysis angle. It is slightly thin for a full code-review workflow (e.g., no diff retrieval or comment posting), but not problematic.

    Completeness3/5

    The surface covers three common analysis types but lacks lifecycle operations such as fetching code changes, retrieving diffs, or posting review comments. These gaps may force agents to combine with other tools to complete a review workflow.

    Related MCP Connectors

    Related MCP Servers