A
licenseA
qualityA
maintenanceAI-powered codebase health analysis — detects dead code, circular dependencies, coupling issues, and architectural drift. 6 MCP tools for Claude Desktop, Cursor, Windsurf, and Slack.
6
45
MIT
@cubiczan/chp-mcp
Related Servers
Alternatives to @cubiczan/chp-mcp
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceA code quality analysis server that detects security vulnerabilities, deceptive patterns, incomplete code, and highlights good practices in source code for MCP-compatible clients like Claude Code.3-
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceAGENTS.md + skills orchestration with CHP Profile A R0/adversary gates. @cubiczan/agent-conductor718MIT
Related Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables MCP clients to evaluate CHP Profile B capital gates, including spend/mandate decisions, human-approval workflows, canonical JSON hashing, and signed audit ledger records.25MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceProvides a human-in-the-loop approval gateway for AI agents, enforcing policies and audit logging for MCP-compatible tool calls.Apache 2.0
Datashift MCP Serverofficial
AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables AI agents to submit tasks for human or AI review and receive decisions via MCP tools, adding human review checkpoints to workflows.MIT- FlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceAn MCP approval gate that ensures agents execute only human-approved, hash-verified actions, providing fail-closed consent for consequential operations.-
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceProvides MCP tools to enforce spend policies (allow, deny, step-up, allowlist) on agent wallets with an immutable audit trail.-
- FlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceGovernance/control plane for MCP-enabled coding-agent workflows with validation, findings, approvals, budgets, and proof bundles.5511-
TDQS
A4/5.0
Scored across 4 tools
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool has a clearly distinct role: evaluate_spend_gate runs the policy check, approve_spend performs HITL approval, chp_content_hash computes hashes, and chp_version reports versions. No two tools overlap in purpose or could be easily confused.
Naming Consistency4/5
The names are consistent snake_case and mostly follow a verb_noun pattern (evaluate_spend_gate, approve_spend). The chp_ prefixed helpers break that pattern slightly, but the prefix clearly groups utility/version operations, so the overall convention remains predictable.
Tool Count5/5
Four tools is well-scoped for a narrow CHP Profile B protocol surface: gate evaluation, human approval, hashing, and versioning. Each tool earns its place without redundancy or bloat.
Completeness4/5
The core lifecycle is covered: evaluate → approve, with supporting hash and version utilities. A minor gap is the absence of an explicit tool to inspect proposal details, but the described results from evaluate_spend_gate include claims and content hashes, so agents can proceed without major dead ends.
Maintenance
ActivityMaintained
ResponsivenessNo issues