mcp-server-codex
Related Servers
Alternatives to mcp-server-codex
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceEnables MCP-compatible coding agents to execute the local Codex CLI as a coding agent, including code reviews, session resume/fork, and CLI diagnostics.910 npmMIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables MCP clients to spawn and control Codex CLI and Claude Code sessions on the host machine, with session management and filesystem access.4MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables Grok Build to orchestrate the local Codex CLI for code reviews, adversarial reviews, task rescue, session transfer, and background job management through MCP tools.1Apache 2.0
- AlicenseCqualityDmaintenanceBridges MCP clients with local Codex CLI to execute autonomous coding tasks, manage threads, and inspect history via SQLite state.13995 npm4Apache 2.0
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceLocal MCP bridge that lets Codex operate local Claude Code sessions, including listing, starting, resuming, forking, prompting, and stopping conversations via the Remote Control CLI.14MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables MCP clients and external AI supervisors to oversee and steer native Codex sessions through a thin local stdio bridge. It exposes eleven codex_* supervisory tools for tasks such as listing threads, starting turns, observing progress, steering, responding to approvals, interrupting, checkpointing, and rolling over work.MIT
TDQS
Scored across 18 tools
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: session lifecycle, job control, agent messaging, and preset management are all cleanly separated. Even the closely related codex_inbox, codex_reply, and codex_tell are easy to tell apart from their descriptions.
All tools share a consistent codex_ prefix and snake_case format, with clear verb or noun segments following it. The naming is predictable enough that an agent can infer the role of an unfamiliar tool from the pattern.
18 tools is slightly above the ideal compact range, but the count is justified by the multiple coherent clusters: sessions, jobs, inbox/reply messaging, presets, and code review. It feels organized rather than bloated.
The core lifecycle is well covered: start, resume, fork, list, monitor, cancel, and communicate with runs, plus full preset CRUD. Minor gaps exist, such as no explicit session deletion or a way to list all background jobs, but they do not block the main workflows.