Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to AgentBridge

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Agent Bridge is an MCP server that enables local agents like Codex and Claude Code to remotely control a logged-in ChatGPT Pro session in the browser, supporting automated discussions, reviews, and code implementation with secure pairing and multi-session coordination.
      25 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      An MCP server that bridges CLI coding agents like Claude Code, Codex, opencode, and Antigravity into any MCP client, enabling synchronous and asynchronous task execution, follow-up input, and a structured code review tool.
      223 npm
      1
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      A local MCP server that lets Claude delegate scoped work to Codex with structured results and guardrails, supporting planning, code review, build, reverse engineering, and long-running background tasks.
      11
      MIT
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      A local MCP server that connects AI coding agents like Claude, Codex, and Gemini, enabling task routing, cross-model debates, and token-efficient context sharing without external APIs.
      15
      -
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      An MCP server that bridges Claude Code with Antigravity CLI using a Swarm Agent architecture to optimize local development workflows and minimize LLM token costs. Includes a web UI for monitoring agent workflows.
      29
      718 PyPI
      25
      MIT

    TDQS

    A4.1/5.0

    Scored across 3 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: codex_run and antigravity_run target different external CLIs, and bridge_status is the health/status reporter. There is no meaningful overlap or ambiguity between them.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    The two worker tools follow a consistent <cli>_run pattern, while bridge_status deviates by using a noun instead of a verb. This is a minor inconsistency in an otherwise predictable naming scheme.

    Tool Count5/5

    Three tools is well-scoped for a bridge server: one for each external worker and one for status. Every tool earns its place and the count feels appropriate for the server's purpose.

    Completeness4/5

    The core workflows of delegating to either CLI and checking bridge health are covered. Minor gaps exist around job lifecycle management (e.g., listing or canceling active jobs), but these are not critical to the stated purpose.

    Maintenance

    ActivitySlowing
    ResponsivenessNo issues