Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to grokbot-bridge-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      C
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables IDEs and MCP hosts to drive a user's Grok Bot cloud agents, including sending messages, waiting for replies, reading history, and managing agents, secrets, widgets, handoffs, and desktop access. It acts as an outbound bridge from Cursor, Claude, and VS Code to those cloud agents.
      21
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to manage Grok Bots through MCP: create, list, search, and delete bots, send and receive messages, read conversation transcripts, search message history, and check usage.
      11
      2
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables MCP clients like Codex and Claude Code to start or continue conversations with Grok Build, track progress, read completed answers, and cancel running turns using an existing Grok login.
      1
      Apache 2.0
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables MCP clients to invoke Grok Bot through a webhook and receive synchronous tool results from its asynchronous callbacks, with run management, cancellation, and budget guardrails.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables a Grok Bot to reach a local MCP server over loopback to discover eligible projects, start or continue Codex CLI jobs in sandboxed modes, track results, and handle separate OpenAI Responses text requests.
      1
      Apache 2.0

    TDQS

    A4.4/5.0

    Scored across 4 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool has a clearly distinct action: ask sends and waits, check retrieves replies since the last interaction, interrupt stops the current turn, and list enumerates bots without sending. The ask/check pair is complementary rather than overlapping, with descriptions explicitly clarifying when to use each (e.g. after ask returns "running").

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All four tools follow the same grokbot_<verb> snake_case pattern (check, ask, interrupt, list). The naming is predictable and immediately readable.

    Tool Count5/5

    Four tools precisely cover the bridge use case: send, poll, interrupt, and enumerate. Nothing feels padded or missing for a focused async messaging bridge.

    Completeness4/5

    The core lifecycle is covered: discover bots (list), send work (ask), retrieve async replies (check), and cancel (interrupt). Minor gaps exist, such as no explicit way to clear/acknowledge a reply or inspect conversation history, but agents can work around this.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues