Skip to main content
Glama
gscookie

credo

by gscookie
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to credo

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • dark-memory-mcp

      Opita-Code
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      An MCP server that provides persistent memory for AI agents, enabling context retention across sessions and supporting vibe-loop workflows where agent promises and deliverables are tracked and validated.
      MIT

    • KASA

      aikadimsoy
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      A local-first memory vault MCP server for Windows that exposes an encrypted user memory store to agents via a permission-brokered protocol, ensuring user ownership and control over browsing data.
      1
      AGPL 3.0

    • memlawb

      Gitlawb
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Zero-knowledge, self-hostable MCP server providing encrypted durable memory for AI agents, with tools to save, recall, search, list, and delete memories.
      55
      MIT

    • aafp-commons

      davidnichols-ops
      A
      license
      B
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables software agents to maintain a signed, evidence-aware local ledger of claims, with policy-gated proposals, conflict queries, and constitution-pinned access through an MCP stdio server.
      7
      3
      Apache 2.0

    • anamnesis

      axobase001
      F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      MCP server that serves a structured belief graph extracted from Claude conversation history, enabling on-demand retrieval of personal context, projects, preferences, and relationships.
      -
    Deploy Server
    One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

    TDQS

    A4/5.0

    Scored across 7 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    The tools are mostly distinct: value_read, value_add, value_list, value_update, value_drop, value_retract, and value_conflicts each cover a specific operation on values. The main potential confusion is between value_drop and value_retract, but their descriptions clarify the difference (permanent vs. preserving history).

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tool names follow the consistent pattern of 'value_' followed by a verb: read, add, list, update, drop, retract, conflicts. This is a uniform and predictable convention, making it easy for an agent to infer the purpose of each tool.

    Tool Count5/5

    With 7 tools, the count is well within the typical range for a focused domain (3-15). Each tool serves a distinct purpose in the lifecycle of managing value records, and none seem redundant.

    Completeness4/5

    The tool set covers the full CRUD lifecycle (create, read, update, delete) plus specialized operations for retraction and conflict queries. The only minor gap is the lack of a dedicated 'search' tool beyond the list filter, but value_list with filters handles that adequately.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources