Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to Plane MCP Server

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      B
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      A Model Context Protocol server that enables AI interfaces to seamlessly interact with Plane's project management system, allowing management of projects, issues, states, and other work items through a standardized API.
      46
      121 npm
      333
      MIT
    • A
      license
      B
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      A Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that enables LLMs to interact with Plane.so, allowing them to manage projects and issues through Plane's API. Using this server, LLMs like Claude can directly interact with your project management workflows while maintaining user control and security.
      76
      19 npm
      1
      MIT
    • A
      license
      B
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      An MCP server that enables LLMs to fully manage a Plane workspace, including projects, work items, states, labels, cycles, modules, comments, and members.
      38
      MIT

    TDQS

    B3.4/5.0

    Scored across 177 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool targets a distinct resource and action; even the many list_* variants (cycle/module/milestone/release/customer work items) are clearly differentiated by name and description. The handful of manage_* tools are each scoped to a unique association type, so there is no meaningful overlap.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    The vast majority follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (list_, create_, retrieve_, update_, delete_). Minor deviations exist: get_ is used for some reads (get_me, get_features, get_project_members) while retrieve_ is used for resource fetches, and read_work_item_attachment breaks the pattern, but the conventions are still predictable and readable.

    Tool Count1/5

    177 tools is an extreme mismatch for an MCP server surface; even large API client servers rarely warrant this many. Agents will struggle to select from such a huge menu, and the count far exceeds the recommended upper bound.

    Completeness4/5

    CRUD/lifecycle coverage is nearly complete for all major resources (projects, work items, cycles, modules, initiatives, labels, states, milestones, releases, customers, properties, types), including specialized sub-resources like comments, attachments, relations, and work logs. The only notable gaps are missing update/delete for pages and a few workspace-level operations.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues