Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to brindley

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enforces a git-tracked, code-checked finite state machine that hands control between a planning director and a local Ollama implementor, exposing tools to check phase status, transition states, and run the implementor to execute plan step files one at a time. It enables a project to be planned, implemented step by step with per-step test gating, and validated before completion.
      1
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables teams of coding agents to share one live plan synced through their existing git remote, so each agent receives teammates' contract, decision, and task changes at its next tool call. Provides tools for publishing contracts, logging decisions, adding and claiming tasks, and reviewing the plan for contradictions.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Repository-native protocol and MCP server for coordinating work items, documentation, changelogs, and project memory between humans and AI agents, using Markdown files in a Git repository as the canonical data source.
      30
      3
      MIT
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to manage a file-backed ticketing system directly within a local repository using a structured state machine and directory hierarchy. It enforces strict markdown schemas and provides specialized tools for claiming tasks, appending work logs, and validating ticket metadata.
      -

    TDQS

    B3.3/5.0

    Scored across 20 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Most tools target distinct resources/actions (collections vs initiatives, list vs get vs ready, validate vs check_docs). A few boundaries blur: update/set_status/complete all touch status (set_status explicitly delegates done to complete), and questions/next_question overlap in surface. Descriptions generally clarify these, so misselection is limited.

    Naming Consistency3/5

    Mutations follow a verb_noun pattern (create_collection, set_status, add_question, set_dependencies, regenerate_readmes), but queries and core ops use bare nouns or verbs (collections, list, get, ready, graph, tags, create, update, complete). It is readable but mixes conventions rather than following one predictable scheme.

    Tool Count4/5

    20 tools is on the heavy side, but the domain (initiatives, collections, lifecycle, dependencies, questions, graph, validation, docs linting) is genuinely rich and each tool maps to a real workflow. A couple could arguably be folded together (next_question into questions), keeping it just short of ideal.

    Completeness4/5

    The initiative lifecycle is well covered: create, update, set_status, complete, questions, dependencies, plus collections and validation. The notable gap is deletion/removal—there is no tool to delete an initiative or collection, so the surface is not fully CRUD-complete.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues