Skip to main content
Glama
kodaimaehata

Cursor Reviewer MCP

by kodaimaehata
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to Cursor Reviewer MCP

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • Code Review MCP

      shadabbi
      -
      license
      C
      quality
      Not graded
      maintenance
      Enables comprehensive GitHub PR reviews through Cursor's AI by fetching PR diffs, running static analysis tools (ESLint, Prettier, TypeScript, Semgrep), executing tests, and generating detailed code review reports with inline comments.
      9
      1,632 npm
      1
      -

    • MCP Code Reviewer

      parthamehta123
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables AI-powered code review and improvement, including analysis, refactoring suggestions, and automatic test generation, with an optional agentic loop for iterative refinement.
      MIT

    • Review MCP Server

      je4550
      F
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables Claude to perform thorough code reviews by integrating with Codex and Gemini CLIs to provide senior-level feedback on code quality, security, performance, and best practices. Supports reviewing code snippets, individual files, or entire directories with automatic detection of available review tools.
      4
      -

    • Git Code Review MCP

      AyoubTRD
      A
      license
      B
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables AI assistants to perform code reviews by providing access to staged files, git diffs, and repository file content. It allows users to evaluate changes and context within any local git repository before committing or pushing.
      3
      4 npm
      ISC
    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

    C2.9/5.0

    Scored across 2 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: codex.review uses Codex CLI, while cursor.review uses Cursor CLI with GPT-5. There is no overlap in functionality as each targets a different review system, making misselection unlikely.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Both tools follow a consistent naming pattern: they use a prefix (codex or cursor) followed by a dot and the action 'review'. This pattern is uniform across all tools, making them predictable and easy to identify.

    Tool Count2/5

    With only 2 tools, the server feels thin for a 'Cursor Reviewer' domain, as it lacks operations like listing reviews, updating reviews, or handling review feedback. The count is too low to support comprehensive review workflows.

    Completeness2/5

    The tool surface is severely incomplete for a review system; it only provides review creation via two CLI methods, missing essential CRUD operations such as retrieving, updating, deleting reviews, or managing review-related data. This will likely cause agent failures in broader tasks.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources