F
licenseNot graded
qualityB
maintenanceLocal-first code retrieval for AI agents — cuts codebase context from thousands of tokens to a few hundred, with zero hallucinated file paths.
3
-
redcon
by natiixnt
Related Servers
Alternatives to redcon
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceTask-adaptive repository context for coding agents, enabling budgeted evidence retrieval without API keys or network calls.1MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceDeterministic context compression for MCP agents, reducing token usage via 11 tools for prompts, history, shell output, file deltas, and code navigation without ML or GPU.9MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceReduces token consumption for AI coding agents by 50-70% through intelligent code context filtering, Git delta tracking, and local SQLite/Tree-sitter indexing.167 npmMIT
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceNext-gen AST codebase map, token compression (70%~85% savings), and context packaging engine for AI coding agents & IDEs.43MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceDeterministic context selection for AI coding agents. Scores and selects the minimal file set for each task, then records outcomes into a local ledger that compounds into reusable patterns.8-
TDQS
A3.9/5.0
Scored across 9 tools
Disambiguation4/5
Most tools have clearly distinct purposes: repo_map provides ranked file signatures, overview gives directory grouping, rank prioritizes files, compress condenses a file, search and structural_search differ by regex vs AST, and budget plans token allocation. The only notable overlap is between redcon_run and redcon_quality_check, both of which run shell commands and compress output, but their verification approaches differ.
Naming Consistency3/5
All tools share the redcon_ prefix and use snake_case, but the second part mixes nouns (repo_map, overview, budget) and verbs (rank, compress, search, run) without a consistent verb_noun pattern. This makes the API slightly less predictable, though still readable.
Tool Count5/5
9 tools is well-scoped for a code exploration and compression server. Each tool covers a distinct phase of the workflow—ranking, mapping, searching, compressing, budgeting, and running commands—without unnecessary bloat or gaps.
Completeness4/5
The tool surface covers the core workflows: orientation (overview), relevance ranking (rank), structural mapping (repo_map), searching (search, structural_search), file compression (compress), budget planning (budget), and command execution (run, quality_check). A direct full-file read is absent, but that is intentional given the server's compression-focused design, so the gap is minor.
Maintenance
ActivitySlowing
ResponsivenessResponsive