codebase-doctor
Related Servers
Alternatives to codebase-doctor
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceLocal-first security check for AI coding agents — finds hardcoded secrets, exposed .env files, git-history leaks and vulnerable dependencies (OSV), entirely on your machine. Ask your agent "is this safe to ship?" and get a Launch Readiness score with a fix for every finding.MIT
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceLocal, deterministic review of Git changes for coding agents: weakened tests and CI gates, security-boundary changes, input-to-sink flows, and blast radius. Runs the RepoPilot Rust CLI over stdio; no source leaves the machine and no model is called.6188 npm24Apache 2.0
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceLocal code-graph engine for AI coding workflows: static analysis of Rust, Cangjie, ArkTS, TypeScript/JavaScript, C/C++, Python, and Shell projects into symbols, imports, call graphs, and quality gates, with pre-commit change review and impact analysis. Read-only by design — never executes build scripts or uploads code.61MIT
- AlicenseBqualityCmaintenanceEnables AI coding agents to perform evidence-based, read-only audits of supported software projects by exposing bounded project inventory and static-analysis findings for discovery, code review, integration tracing, security, and tests. Reports are returned as Markdown or JSON directly in the tool response, with no code executed or files written.8281 npmMIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables coding agents to check npm packages, GitHub Action refs, and remote scripts before execution, returning deterministic ALLOW/DENY/REVIEW verdicts with evidence and a re-checkable manifest.MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables AI coding agents to interrogate a local repository deterministically for symbols, dependencies, call paths, routes, tests, and Git impact, returning verified structured evidence with exact line citations instead of requiring the whole codebase to be read.4MIT
TDQS
Scored across 7 tools
Most tools target clearly distinct audit-lifecycle operations, and descriptions distinguish full audit, changed-scope review, repair verification, and intent verification. The main overlap is audit_codebase vs build_receipt, both of which run a read-only audit, though their outputs (full report vs coverage receipt) are sufficiently differentiated.
All seven tool names follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern. The verbs are varied but predictable, and there are no mixed conventions or naming collisions.
Seven tools is well within the appropriate range for a focused audit/verification server. Each tool maps to a distinct operation in the audit lifecycle, and there is no apparent filler.
The surface covers auditing, receipt generation, changed-code review, repair verification, finding explanation, intent verification, and capability discovery. Minor gaps exist around dedicated finding enumeration/filtering and receipt comparison or verification, but agents can work around these using the existing tools.