Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to open-code-review

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      D
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Skylos MCP server exposes static analysis as tools for AI coding agents — scan any Python, TypeScript, or Go codebase for dead code, security vulnerabilities, and quality issues directly from Claude, Cursor, or any MCP-compatible client. Returns findings with file paths, line numbers, and severity so agents can auto-fix issues in context.
      12
      13,750 PyPI
      836
      Apache 2.0
    • A
      license
      B
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Security MCP server with 300+ rules for AI-generated code. Scans Next.js, Supabase, Clerk, Stripe, Prisma, Hono, GraphQL and 20+ modules. Zero config, runs locally.
      39
      2,352 npm
      5
      Apache 2.0
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      AI-powered codebase intelligence tool that builds a dependency graph of a git repo for structural Q&A and pre-PR code review. It exposes MCP tools for blast radius, review sessions, and static analysis, running locally over stdio with no LLM or network dependencies.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Static analysis for vibe-coded apps. Flags security, reliability, performance, and AI quality issues in code generated by Cursor, v0, Bolt, and Copilot.
      380 npm
      15
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables AI-powered, zero-trust code review with multiple models, supporting single files, git diffs, and multiple files, with security, performance, and architecture checks across 10+ languages.
      13
      MIT

    TDQS

    A3.5/5.0

    Scored across 4 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose with no overlap: explain_issue provides explanations, heal_code prepares repair prompts, scan_diff analyzes git diffs, and scan_directory scans directories. The descriptions clearly differentiate their functions, making misselection unlikely.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (explain_issue, heal_code, scan_diff, scan_directory) with clear, descriptive verbs that match their actions. There are no deviations in naming conventions.

    Tool Count4/5

    Four tools are reasonable for a code review server, covering explanation, repair, diff scanning, and directory scanning. It's slightly lean but well-scoped, as each tool serves a distinct function without redundancy.

    Completeness4/5

    The tool set covers key code review workflows: scanning (diff and directory), explaining issues, and preparing repairs. Minor gaps might include tools for applying fixes directly or managing review states, but the core functionality is well-covered for the domain.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessNo issues