Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
OpenProject CE MCP

OpenProject CE MCP

by jtauschl
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to OpenProject CE MCP

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • openproject-mcp-and-skills

      chien334
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      MCP server enabling AI agents to interact with OpenProject API v3 for project management, including creating and managing work packages, projects, comments, time entries, boards, and user dashboards.
      61 npm
      MIT

    • LTD MCP

      Eshway
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      MCP server that lets AI agents connect to LTD project workspaces to inspect project health, search and manage tasks, assign owners, and add comments, with scoped tokens and preview-confirm safety for writes.
      2
      MIT

    • OpenProject MCP Server

      Morrisdev
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      An MCP server that connects Claude Desktop to your OpenProject instance, allowing you to manage projects, tasks, and time entries through natural language.
      MIT
    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

    B3.4/5.0

    Scored across 147 tools

    Disambiguation3/5

    Descriptions are unusually detailed and explicitly cross-reference each other, which rescues many boundaries. However, there is genuine overlap in the work-package listing family (list_work_packages, search_work_packages, list_my_open_work_packages, execute_query, get_work_packages) and in paired tools like create_time_entry vs create_time_entry_until and list_work_package_relations vs list_relations. An agent can usually pick correctly after reading, but misselection is easy without the docstrings.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    Names overwhelmingly follow a snake_case verb_noun pattern (list_/get_/create_/update_/delete_ + resource), consistently across projects, work packages, meetings, memberships, etc. A few outliers exist (execute_query, toggle_activity_emoji_reaction, get_project_work_package_context, bulk_* prefixes), but they are readable and follow their own sub-convention.

    Tool Count1/5

    147 tools is far beyond any reasonable surface for an agent-facing MCP server; the rules mark 50+ as an extreme mismatch. While the domain (a full project-management suite) is broad, this count imposes heavy context cost and makes tool selection error-prone even with excellent descriptions.

    Completeness4/5

    Coverage is very broad: full CRUD for projects, work packages, relations, time entries, versions, memberships, meetings/series/agenda/outcomes, boards, grids, news, and many read-only integrations, with upstream limitations (wiki body text, posts, cost entries, statuses/types) clearly explained. Minor gaps remain—notably no create/delete for documents, and write operations for sprints/backlog buckets are absent—but they are narrow.

    Maintenance

    ActivityActive
    ResponsivenessOutdated data

    Resources