Fluxion Bus
Related Servers
Alternatives to Fluxion Bus
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceProvides a provider-agnostic MCP server that coordinates structured multi-agent workflows, owning task claims, action logs, handoffs, and server-side health gates for coding agents. It enables tracked specs, tasks, reviews, and verified completion across Claude Code, Codex CLI, Cursor, Grok Build, and OpenCode.29 npmMIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceA local MCP server that connects AI coding agents (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, etc.) on the same machine via a shared message bus, enabling them to chat, delegate tasks, and collaborate privately without cloud or internet.73 npmMIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables Claude and Codex agents to delegate implementation, testing, research, or review tasks to each other through local MCP tools, while supporting persistent sessions, isolated editing workspaces, and reviewed integration. It also allows progress tracking, cancellation, model selection, and management handoff between providers.2MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceAn MCP server that coordinates AI coding agents with mobile notifications, enabling task queues, inter-agent messaging, session monitoring, and human-in-the-loop approvals.MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceA local MCP server that connects AI coding agents like Claude, Codex, and Gemini, enabling task routing, cross-model debates, and token-efficient context sharing without external APIs.18-
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceThis local MCP server lets a primary AI assistant delegate tasks in parallel to specialized sub-agent CLIs (Gemini, Claude, Codex, Cursor) that share the same project context, then aggregates and synthesizes their findings into one response. It uses existing CLI tools and API subscriptions with no markup, supporting 26+ MCP-compatible IDEs.-
TDQS
Scored across 13 tools
Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, and the lifecycle around run_subagent is well separated. The main risk is get_task_status vs get_task_result (both return run data with overlapping fields) and cancel_subagent_run vs force_cancel_subagent_run, though the latter is explicitly an escalation.
Tool names consistently follow snake_case verb_noun: list_projects, get_project, run_subagent, get_task_status, cancel_subagent_run. Minor stylistic variants like force_cancel_ and wait_for_ are still in the same pattern and do not create confusion.
13 tools is within the ideal range and each tool covers a distinct area of the subagent-run lifecycle, configuration, and maintenance. The count feels appropriate for the orchestration scope without redundant bulk.
The surface covers the full run lifecycle: submit, poll, retrieve results, cancel, force-cancel, and revert, plus supporting queries for projects, models, server status, authorization waits, and stale-run reconciliation. No obvious dead ends or missing critical operations.