Skip to main content
Glama
shreyasKaturi2004

test-intelligence-mcp

Related Servers

Alternatives to test-intelligence-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Analyzes codebases to produce structured quality health reports with risk-scored modules based on git churn, test coverage, and test-to-source mapping, acting as an MCP server for AI coding agents and a standalone CLI.
      14 PyPI
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      MCP server for test impact analysis and code intelligence. Maps tests to code and git history to determine impacted tests, risk scores, and ownership for AI coding agents.
      3
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      This MCP server enables automated maintenance and code analysis for Python/pytest repositories in isolated Docker environments. It supports read-only investigations, fix-and-verify tasks, and provides full audit trails with SQLite event history and artifact exports.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      This MCP server builds a local flakiness knowledge graph from Playwright test run history and enables AI agents to query flaky tests, failure patterns, trends, and correlated git commits, helping diagnose test reliability without manual analysis.
      48 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      A production-ready MCP server that provides comprehensive dbt project quality assessment for any GitHub repository, enabling AI agents to analyze dbt models, check metadata coverage, and map data lineage.
      9
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      A universal AI-powered testing server built on the Model Context Protocol (MCP). Allows AI agents to inspect, execute, test, monitor, debug, and report on software projects.
      3
      GNU Lesser General Public v2.1 only

    TDQS

    A4.2/5.0

    Scored across 6 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool targets a distinct function: coverage analysis, flaky detection, risk prediction, test execution recording, history querying, and model training. There is no functional overlap, and the descriptions clearly differentiate their purposes.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    Tool names consistently use a verb_noun pattern (e.g., analyze_coverage, detect_flaky_tests, train_risk_model). The pattern is clear and predictable, though 'record_test_run' and 'get_test_history' slightly shift the pattern (record vs. get, test_run vs. test_history), but it's still minor and readable.

    Tool Count5/5

    With 6 tools, the set is well-scoped for a CI/testing intelligence server. Each tool covers a necessary stage (record, query, analyze, detect flakiness, predict risk, train model), and none feel redundant or extraneous.

    Completeness4/5

    The tool set covers the core lifecycle: recording test runs (record_test_run), querying history (get_test_history), analyzing coverage (analyze_coverage), detecting flakiness (detect_flaky_tests), predicting risk (predict_pr_risk), and training the risk model (train_risk_model). A minor gap is the lack of a tool to delete or manage stored history, but the essential pipeline is complete.

    Maintenance

    ActivitySlowing
    ResponsivenessNo issues