A
licenseNot graded
qualityC
maintenanceEnables hybrid code audits using MCP tools across 12 domains, producing structured, scored, and actionable code quality reports.
9 npm
1
MIT
Code Guardian
Related Servers
Alternatives to Code Guardian
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceEnables agents to audit and safeguard repositories by detecting dependency pinning issues, license compliance problems, hardcoded secrets, and dead code through MCP tools.4MIT
Celmis MCP Serverofficial
AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceEnables querying indexed code across multiple repositories with file-level citations, reviewing pull requests, auditing dependencies, and exporting SBOMs and evidence packs through MCP tools.3AGPL 3.0- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables automated pull request review, security vulnerability analysis, and code quality improvement suggestions through any MCP client.15 npmMIT
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceEnables MCP clients to run deterministic AST safety audits, secret scanning, and sandboxed test execution on codebases, with human approval required before any remediation action.5MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables AI coding environments to enforce engineering governance through MCP tools and resources for init, check, route, and review workflows.12 npm2MIT
TDQS
B3.3/5.0
Scored across 15 tools
Disambiguation3/5
The check_* family (tests, linting, security, architecture, CI/CD, branch) is well-separated by suffix, but audit_codebase and production_readiness heavily overlap as both assess overall codebase health. generate_starter_repo and generate_production_code also blur boundaries (full scaffold vs. feature templates), though descriptions partially clarify the distinction.
Naming Consistency4/5
Most tools follow a clear verb_noun snake_case convention (check_tests, generate_starter_repo, audit_codebase, detect_agent). The single outlier is production_readiness, which is a noun phrase rather than a verb action, and the mix of check_/generate_/get_ verbs is still predictable. Overall the pattern is consistent with one minor deviation.
Tool Count4/5
At 15 tools, the server sits at the upper boundary of a well-scoped set and is reasonable for a code-quality/readiness domain. A few tools feel tangential (detect_agent, get_agent_guidance) and add bulk without directly serving code auditing, but the count is not excessive.
Completeness4/5
The surface covers detection (checks), broad assessment (audit, scorecard), generation (starter repo, code templates, workflows, checklists), and reference guidance (industry patterns, agent practices). Notable gaps include a remediation/fix tool and test coverage analysis, but core workflows such as audit, generate, and recommend are well represented.
Maintenance
ActivityMaintained
ResponsivenessResponsive