GitHub MCP Server
Related Servers
Alternatives to GitHub MCP Server
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- FlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceAn MCP server that allows Claude and other MCP-compatible LLMs to interact with the GitHub API, supporting features like creating issues, getting repository information, listing issues, and searching repositories.4-
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceA local MCP server that lets Claude Desktop access GitHub via a personal access token, with tools for repos, issues, PRs, code search, and more.9379 npmISC
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceA working MCP server that connects to the real GitHub API, enabling users to manage repositories, issues, pull requests, and more through natural language in Claude Desktop.-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceAn MCP server that provides tools for interacting with the GitHub API, enabling AI assistants to query repositories, pull requests, issues, commits, users, and more.379 npmISC
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that enables AI assistants like Claude to interact with the GitHub API directly.7 npmMIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that connects Claude AI directly to the GitHub API, enabling natural language queries for live repository data, issues, PRs, and contributions.1-
TDQS
Scored across 4 tools
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: create-issue handles issue creation, get-repo-info retrieves repository details, list-issues lists existing issues, and search-repos searches for repositories. There is no overlap or ambiguity in functionality.
The naming follows a consistent verb-noun pattern (create-issue, get-repo-info, list-issues, search-repos), with all tools using hyphen-separated lowercase. The minor deviation is that 'get-repo-info' includes an extra 'info' suffix, but overall the pattern is predictable and readable.
With only 4 tools, the set feels thin for a GitHub server, lacking common operations like updating/deleting issues, managing pull requests, or accessing repository contents. While the tools are well-scoped, the count is borderline low for the domain's typical scope.
The tool surface has significant gaps for a GitHub server. It covers basic issue and repository operations but misses critical CRUD/lifecycle coverage (e.g., no update/delete for issues, no pull request tools, no repository modification). This will likely cause agent failures in common workflows.