Skip to main content
Glama
srivastava-aryan

pr-reviewer-mcp

by srivastava-aryan
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

Related Servers

Alternatives to pr-reviewer-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • commit-to-pr-mcp

      vltansky
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      An MCP server that enables AI agents to retrieve detailed GitHub Pull Request information using git commit hashes, branch names, or PR numbers. It automatically detects repositories and extracts comprehensive PR data including descriptions, labels, and reviews via the GitHub CLI.
      1
      8 npm
      ISC

    • GitHub MCP Server

      Xiao-rx
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      An MCP server that enables AI agents to directly manage GitHub repositories, including PRs, issues, and code search, using natural language.
      MIT

    • github-devhub-mcp

      VINITVINAY-Tech
      F
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      An MCP server that brings GitHub workflow tools (repo, PR, issue, CI) and cost-free LLM-powered engineering tools (PR review, issue triage, commit messages) to any MCP client via the Groq free tier.
      17
      -

    • codereview-mcp

      lfylow
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      An MCP server that lets AI agents review code using language models, supporting git diffs, files, and snippets with severity levels. Works with Ollama (local) and hosted providers like OpenAI, Anthropic, and OpenRouter.
      3
      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

    A3.8/5.0

    Scored across 5 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool targets a distinct operation: listing PRs, fetching diffs, reviewing individual files, reviewing full PRs, and posting comments. No functional overlap.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (list_open_prs, get_pr_diff, review_file, review_pr, post_review_comment), making them predictable.

    Tool Count5/5

    Five tools is appropriate for a focused PR review server—enough to cover core functionality without being excessive or thin.

    Completeness4/5

    Covers the full review workflow (list, diff, review file, review PR, post comment). Lacks tools for approval or dismissal, but those are outside the stated scope.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources