F
licenseNot graded
qualityB
maintenanceEnables managing tasks through a simple task tracker with REST API and MCP tools for listing, creating, updating, assigning, and deleting tasks.
-
goby-mcp
Officialby matogen
Related Servers
Alternatives to goby-mcp
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceEnables MCP-capable clients to browse, search, and manage projects, todos, messages, card tables, documents, uploads, comments, events, and webhooks through OAuth-authenticated API calls.-
- FlicenseBqualityBmaintenanceEnables managing boards, tasks, subtasks, labels, and assignees in a Google Apps Script-backed todo system through MCP tools, with secure API key authentication and remote deployment support.14-
- AlicenseBqualityAmaintenanceEnables task management through MCP, including creating, reading, updating, deleting, and completing tasks, with filtering by status, priority, or due date and secure token-based authentication.6GPL 3.0
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables MCP clients to manage Google Tasks, including creating, updating, deleting, and listing tasks and task lists, with optional due dates and subtasks.80 npmMIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables MCP clients to create, list, complete, and delete tasks and to create and list reminders through a bearer-token-protected Streamable HTTP endpoint, supporting a Plan → Act → Verify → Recover workflow.MIT
TDQS
A4/5.0
Scored across 18 tools
Disambiguation5/5
Every tool targets a distinct concern: auth introspection, task CRUD, comments, webhooks, and project tokens. The list_* getters are clearly separated by noun (statuses, members, labels, tasks), so there is no meaningful overlap or ambiguity.
Naming Consistency5/5
Naming is highly predictable: list-* for reads, get-* for single resources, create-/update-/delete- for mutations, and add- for comments. The one outlier, whoami, is a conventional CLI-style name and does not create confusion.
Tool Count4/5
18 tools is on the higher side but justified: task management, comments, history, webhooks, and token management each need their own surface. There are no redundant tools, though a few administrative helpers could potentially be consolidated.
Completeness4/5
The core domain is well covered: task CRUD (minus explicit deletion/archival), comments, history, webhooks, and token configuration. Missing task delete/archive and comment edit/delete are minor gaps, and webhook delivery inspection would round it out, but the main workflows are complete.
Maintenance
ActivityMaintained
ResponsivenessNo issues