Skip to main content
Glama
sadayamuthu

mergelock

by sadayamuthu
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Go
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to mergelock

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • rosentic-mcp

      Rosentic
      F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Checks cross-branch compatibility for merge conflicts by detecting function signature changes, route conflicts, and schema mismatches across 15+ languages using AST analysis.
      -

    • semamerge

      vineethwilson15
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      MCP server that detects semantic (non-textual) merge conflicts between Git branches using AST-level analysis. Catches incompatible changes that Git merges cleanly — signature changes, removed exports, parameter changes, interface breaks, and cross-file dependency conflicts.
      4
      26 npm
      MIT

    • Code Impact MCP

      vk0dev
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Fast pre-commit dependency gate for AI-assisted code changes. Answers "is this safe to commit?" with a PASS/WARN/BLOCK verdict in seconds, so you can catch risky blast radius before a bad commit, not after it. No database, no heavy setup.
      5
      83 npm
      1
      MIT

    • IRIS Regression Memory

      haleema-ignite
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables deterministic behavioral regression review of pull-request diffs by checking changed code against approved incident-derived contracts. It exposes read-only tools to assess diffs and pull requests, list and fetch contracts, and report outcomes over stdio without mutating repositories.
      MIT
    Deploy Server
    One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

    TDQS

    A3.6/5.0

    Scored across 2 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: check runs a merge-conflict analysis on branches, while claims lists declared work scopes. An agent can easily tell which to use in a given situation with no overlap.

    Naming Consistency3/5

    Both names are single lowercase words, but one is a verb (check) and the other a noun (claims), so there is no predictable verb_noun convention. It is readable but not a consistent pattern.

    Tool Count3/5

    With only 2 tools the surface feels thin for a merge-lock/claim coordination system. It is defensible for a v0.1, but limited.

    Completeness3/5

    The claims tool is explicitly read-only in v0.1, so there is no way to declare or release a claim, and only a single conflict-check operation exists. Notable lifecycle gaps remain, though the descriptions acknowledge the v0.1 scope.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources