dsh-claude-mcp
Related Servers
Alternatives to dsh-claude-mcp
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceEnables running one Codex CLI task at a time in an isolated temporary folder, returning Codex's answer and a manifest of produced files for manual review and selective copying.1MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceEnables MCP clients such as Cursor to hand a bounded task to a scoped, non-interactive Claude Code session billed to a Claude subscription rather than Cursor model credits. Runs read-only by default, with optional file edits or Bash, plus budget, timeout, and session-resume controls.12 npmMIT
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceLets an MCP client hand coding tasks, second-opinion reviews, and image-asset generation to the official OpenAI CLI agent running locally, returning final messages, session IDs, and saved files. Jobs run sandboxed with prompts over stdin, work asynchronously with polling, and expose a live model catalog without needing an API key.5MIT
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceEnables MCP clients to delegate coding tasks to the local Codex CLI synchronously, returning a compact report with the model's final message, git diff/status, exit code, and threadId.122 npmMIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables ISLI agents and MCP clients to dispatch natural-language coding and terminal tasks to a locally-installed Claude Code CLI, supporting both one-shot execution and persistent sessions with workspace and security controls.-
- AlicenseBqualityBmaintenanceEnables delegating coding tasks to the local cursor-agent CLI synchronously, blocking until completion and returning a compact report with diff, status, and session ID.115 npmMIT
TDQS
Scored across 1 tool
With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusing it with another. Its purpose—running a Claude Code task in an isolated scratch directory—is clearly stated and unambiguous.
The single tool is named 'run', a simple verb that clearly reflects its action. No other tools exist to create inconsistency, so naming is perfectly predictable.
A single tool is on the thin side for an MCP server, even one with a narrow focus. While it may be sufficient for the core operation, the rubric considers 1-2 tools borderline.
The core workflow—run a task, return the final message and artifact manifest—is covered. However, there is no explicit lifecycle management (e.g., cancel, list runs) or in-server artifact retrieval, though the latter is intentionally omitted for security.