Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to FlightPlan

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Shared, versioned memory and governance control plane for AI coding agents. Compiler pipeline resolves architectural decision conflicts across Claude Code, Cursor, and custom agent fleets.
      3
      6
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Coordination layer for AI coding agents working on the same codebase. Adds file locks, shared project memory, and cross-machine file sync so Claude Code, Cursor, Windsurf, and other MCP agents stop overwriting each other.
      52
      Apache 2.0
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Multiplayer coordination for AI coding agents: Claude Code, Codex CLI and Cursor share one room per repository. An agent claims a path glob before it edits and a conflicting claim is refused at claim time, so collisions are prevented rather than resolved at merge. Metadata only — source code and diffs never leave the machine.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI coding agents to share project memory, rules, and live coordination so they can see each other's changes and avoid conflicts before writing code. It provides local-first context and impact notifications across agents and sessions.
      1
      Apache 2.0
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables teams of coding agents to share one live plan synced through their existing git remote, so each agent receives teammates' contract, decision, and task changes at its next tool call. Provides tools for publishing contracts, logging decisions, adding and claiming tasks, and reviewing the plan for contradictions.
      712 npm
      4
      MIT

    TDQS

    A4.4/5.0

    Scored across 6 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    The six tools have mostly clear lifecycle boundaries: post, update, complete, get, list, and mark landed. However, list_intents is overloaded with three distinct modes (pre-planning semantic check, glob collision check, context search), and collision/overlap results also surface from post_intent and update_intent, which could make tool selection less immediate despite detailed guidance.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tool names use snake_case and a predictable verb_object pattern: list_intents, post_intent, complete_intent, get_intent, mark_intent_landed, update_intent. The lone four-word name, mark_intent_landed, is still consistent and readable.

    Tool Count5/5

    Six tools are well-scoped for an intent registry: create, list/query, fetch, update, complete, and mark landed. Each tool earns its place without obvious redundancy or missing lifecycle operations.

    Completeness5/5

    The surface covers the full lifecycle for work intents: registration, search/listing, detail retrieval, mid-flight updates and TTL renewal, completion with outcome, and post-completion landing correction. No obvious CRUD or workflow gap remains for the stated domain.

    Maintenance

    ActivityNo data
    ResponsivenessOutdated data