Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
polaris-mcp

polaris-mcp

by polaris-harness
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to polaris-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • Attenza

      maxhillaert
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Provides OAuth-based MCP integration and client-side tooling for connecting agents to a remote service, with CLI and plugin support.
      MIT

    • GoogleMCP

      1solomonwakhungu
      A
      license
      B
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Gives an MCP client scoped, read-only-by-default access to your own Google account across Workspace apps and other Google APIs including Gmail, Calendar, Drive, Tasks, YouTube, Search Console, Analytics, and Photos. Runs locally over stdio with per-product write and separate destructive-tool opt-ins using your own OAuth client.
      45
      MIT
    • Daykeeper MCP

      Daykeeper MCPofficial

      SkyPorch
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      A local stdio MCP adapter for the Daykeeper management API. It uses separately issued scoped credentials and exposes read-only tools by default; planning and mutations require explicit opt-in.
      8
      24 npm
      Apache 2.0

    • Taskade MCP Server

      onur6157
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables MCP clients such as Claude, Cursor, VS Code, and Windsurf to manage workspaces, projects, tasks, AI agents, and app files through hosted OAuth or local stdio tools. It also includes OpenAPI codegen for generating MCP tools from any OpenAPI specification.
      1,927 npm
      MIT

    • gitlab-mcp

      structured-world
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Full-coverage GitLab MCP server with 44 tools across 18 resource types. Agent-optimized CQRS design — one tool call handles complete multi-step operations. Supports OAuth 2.1, read-only mode, stdio/SSE/StreamableHTTP transports, and GraphQL-native work items with full hierarchy (epics,issues,etc)
      1,922 npm
      8
      Apache 2.0
    Deploy Server
    Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

    TDQS

    A4/5.0

    Scored across 16 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Most tools map to clearly distinct resources (tribes, squads, targets, functions, evaluations, waivers, etc.), and the descriptions clarify boundaries. However, there is some read-model overlap: polaris_insights duplicates tribe/squad overview and target history actions already exposed in polaris_tribes and polaris_fitness_targets, and the provider/source/producer trio requires careful reading to distinguish. These overlaps are manageable but prevent a perfect score.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Every tool uses a consistent polaris_ prefix followed by a snake_case plural resource noun (polaris_tribes, polaris_fitness_functions, polaris_waivers, etc.). The only minor deviation is the singular polaris_health, but it still fits the predictable pattern. Actions are consistently described inside the tool rather than encoded in names.

    Tool Count4/5

    At 16 tools, the count is slightly above the typical 3–15 sweet spot but reasonable for a domain with many distinct resources and lifecycles (topology, fitness functions, measurements, evaluations, waivers, events). Each tool earns its place by grouping all actions for one resource, avoiding an explosion of per-action tools. It is borderline heavy but well-scoped.

    Completeness4/5

    The surface covers the core lifecycle for most entities: create, version, activate, retire, evaluate, collect, waive, and consume events. Minor gaps exist—several resources (tribes, squads, targets, sources, producers, templates) lack update or delete operations, and some read-model queries are split across tools. These gaps are unlikely to block common agent workflows but keep the surface from being fully complete.

    Maintenance

    ActivityNo data
    ResponsivenessSyncing

    Resources