Skip to main content
Glama
smallp80380

RunningHub MCP

by smallp80380
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to RunningHub MCP

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • workflow-studio

      alexanderradahl
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables bounded, multi-phase coding workflows inside Codex that plan, implement, independently review, repair, and verify repository changes, with an inline dashboard for inspecting runs.
      MIT

    • Codex MCP Server

      cexll
      A
      license
      C
      quality
      F
      maintenance
      Connects AI assistants like Claude to the Codex CLI for code analysis, editing, and execution. Supports file references with @ syntax, sandboxed code execution with approval workflows, and structured code changes for automated refactoring and documentation.
      8
      116 npm
      179
      MIT

    • Claude Code Bridge

      Cyruskraad
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Lets Codex delegate coding and repository work to an installed Claude Code CLI with permission-aware inspect/write access, model and effort selection, resumable and cloud-attached sessions, and durable synchronous or asynchronous jobs.
      MIT

    • codex-mcp-server

      4dhxm
      A
      license
      C
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Bridges MCP clients with local Codex CLI to execute autonomous coding tasks, manage threads, and inspect history via SQLite state.
      13
      577 npm
      4
      Apache 2.0
    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

    C2.9/5.0

    Scored across 24 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Most tools target clearly distinct resources or lifecycle stages, and descriptions explicitly separate local from cloud and discovery from execution. Some potential confusion remains among noun-only multiplexed tools (rh_job, rh_work_item, rh_prepare_generation) and between validate_payload and validate_workflow, but boundaries are generally clear.

    Naming Consistency3/5

    All tools use a consistent rh_ snake_case prefix, but the naming pattern is not uniform: many are verb_noun, while project, asset, scene, work_item, and job are noun-only tools that bundle multiple operations. The names are readable but do not follow one predictable convention.

    Tool Count3/5

    24 tools is heavy for a single MCP server and sits at the upper edge of the 16-25 range before becoming excessive. The domain is broad enough that each tool has some rationale, but the set is large enough to burden selection and increase cognitive load.

    Completeness4/5

    The surface covers discovery, workflow creation/read/edit/validate/export/import/search, project and asset handling, scene and work-item context, generation preparation/run/job/results/review, and capability reporting. Some delete or list operations are absent, such as deleting projects/assets or listing jobs, but core generation lifecycle coverage is strong.

    Resources