Skip to main content
Glama
wenshuo0114

file-reviewer

by wenshuo0114

Related Servers

Alternatives to file-reviewer

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables comprehensive security scanning of code repositories to detect secrets, vulnerabilities, dependency issues, and configuration problems. Provides real-time security checks and best practice recommendations to help developers identify and prevent security issues.
      3 npm
      2
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables code auditing, scanning for committed secrets and vulnerable dependencies, and generating self-review checklists, with optional paid audit pricing.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to safely inspect a local repository's code and metadata while blocking private data from leaving the machine, providing read-only tools for search, change tracking, and integrity verification.
      MIT
    • F
      license
      B
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables security auditing, penetration testing, and compliance validation with tools like Semgrep, Trivy, Gitleaks, and OWASP ZAP. Features strict project boundary enforcement and supports OWASP, CIS, and NIST compliance frameworks.
      7
      -
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables AI coding assistants to inspect local and remote repositories through sandboxed tools that surface project overviews, structure, dependency audits, Git churn hotspots, and a heuristic health score. It also supports safe GitHub issue searching and creation with built-in duplicate preflight checks, while blocking sensitive files, binary content, and path traversal attacks.
      74 npm
      MIT

    TDQS

    A3.7/5.0

    Scored across 18 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    The tool set is cleanly separated into review_*, report_*, review_queue_*, and rollback_* families, and within review_* the scanning, secrets, external paths, user-level configs, metadata, and single-file read functions target different objects. Even actions like report_write_decision and report_external_choice are distinguishable by the description: one records a finding decision, the other records an external-reference choice.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    The namespace-prefix pattern (review_/report_/rollback_/review_queue_) is consistent and predictable, but suffixes mix target nouns like file_metadata and secrets_inventory with imperative verbs like open, read, set_header, and write_fix. This is a minor style inconsistency rather than a functional confusion.

    Tool Count4/5

    18 tools is above the typical 3-15 range, but each tool maps to a distinct step in an unusually complete review workflow: opening repos, scanning files/configs, queuing external paths, writing report entries, and managing rollbacks. The count feels slightly heavy for a single server, but no tool is redundant.

    Completeness4/5

    The tool surface covers the review lifecycle well, including entering repos, scanning files and configs, logging decisions and fixes, queuing external paths, and rollback safety. Minor gaps remain: there is no tool to read or finalize the full report from within the server, and rollback_create implies file edits without a matching edit tool, but agents can work around these using report paths and external file tooling.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues