Skip to main content
Glama
mu373
by mu373

Related Servers

Alternatives to mcp-cosense

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables MCP clients to safely read, write, edit, search, and optionally run commands within one or more named project workspaces, while maintaining a work journal and tracking changes.
      19
      MIT
    • A
      license
      C
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI clients such as ChatGPT and Claude to safely read, analyze, update, verify, and audit GitHub Projects v2 through OAuth-secured MCP connections with role-based access control, guarded writes, bulk preview/approval/apply, checkpoints/deltas, and durable audit trails.
      40
      Apache 2.0
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables permission-preserving access to DefectDojo OSS via MCP, using the caller's own API token, with read tools, deterministic analytics and reporting, plus optional gated write and history tools.
      2
      AGPL 3.0
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables reading and writing Productboard data via MCP tools, with Google OAuth login, per-user allowlist, and workspace binding for secure, audited access.
      -
    • A
      license
      B
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      An MCP server that enables agents to safely interact with CMS content, with deny-by-default write policies, type/field allowlists, and structured audit trails.
      5
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      A least-privilege enforcement proxy for MCP servers. It sits between MCP clients and upstream servers, enforcing tool policies, hiding denied tools, requiring human approval for risky actions, and providing a structured audit trail.
      MIT

    TDQS

    A3.8/5.0

    Scored across 8 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    browse_page and read_page both read a single page, but their purposes are differentiated by output format and edit intent. The search tools, related-pages tool, and preview/submit tools are clearly distinct, so an agent can generally select correctly.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tool names follow a consistent snake_case verb-first pattern such as browse_, read_, search_, preview_, and submit_. The naming conventions are uniform and predictable across the entire set.

    Tool Count5/5

    Eight tools is a well-scoped count for a Cosense page server, covering browsing, reading, searching, previewing edits, and submitting writes without unnecessary duplication. Each tool has a clear role in the workflow.

    Completeness4/5

    Read, browse, search, edit-preview, and submit workflows are covered, and the preview-before-submit flow is well defined. The main gaps are the lack of explicit page deletion, page history, and a dedicated new-page submission tool, though the core page lifecycle is mostly functional.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues