Skip to main content
Glama
nagavitalp

code-health-mcp

by nagavitalp

Server Configuration

Describes the environment variables required to run the server.

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
NODE_ENVNoEnvironment mode
CACHE_DIRNoCache directory
LOG_LEVELNoLogging verbosity
ENABLE_CACHENoEnable caching
GIT_HISTORY_DEPTHNoCommits to analyze

Instructions

Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.

This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.

Capabilities

Features and capabilities supported by this server

Protocol revision2025-11-25

CapabilityDetails
tools
{}

Tools

Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions

NameDescription
analyze_fileA

Analyze a single source code file for readability, maintainability, and complexity metrics

analyze_repositoryB

Perform batch analysis of an entire repository for code health metrics

get_complexity_trendsA

Get historical complexity trends for files over time using git history

predict_refactor_riskA

Predict which files are at risk of needing refactoring based on trends and metrics

get_dependency_graphB

Analyze dependency relationships and identify highly coupled components

Prompts

Interactive templates invoked by user choice

NameDescription

No prompts

Resources

Contextual data attached and managed by the client

NameDescription

No resources

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Scored across 5 tools

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct dimension of code health: single-file analysis, repository-wide analysis, historical trends, risk prediction, and dependency structure. There is no overlapping purpose or ambiguity between these five tools.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (analyze_file, analyze_repository, get_complexity_trends, predict_refactor_risk, get_dependency_graph). This makes the toolset highly predictable and easy to navigate.

Tool Count5/5

Five tools is well-scoped for a focused code health analysis server. Each tool covers a meaningful capability without redundancy or bloat, and the number is within the ideal 3–15 range.

Completeness5/5

The toolset covers the full analysis lifecycle: targeted file inspection, whole-repository analysis, historical trends, forward-looking risk prediction, and dependency coupling. For a read-only analysis domain, there are no obvious missing operations.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues