gitea-mcp
Related Servers
Alternatives to gitea-mcp
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceA custom MCP server that lets AI assistants interact with GitHub accounts, offering tools for repository creation, file viewing, code search, and issue management.-
- AlicenseBqualityFmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol (MCP) server for Forgejo and Gitea instances, enabling AI assistants to interact with repositories, issues, pull requests, and more.100210 npm10MIT
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceAn MCP server that enables AI assistants to interact with GitHub via a fine-grained personal access token — pushing commits, managing branches, opening and merging PRs, creating issues, and reading repositories. It runs locally with no telemetry and supports a read-only mode.151MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceMCP server for the GitCode API, enabling AI assistants to interact with GitCode repositories, issues, pull requests, and more.1MIT
- FlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceMCP server that lets AI agents interact with GitHub using natural language, supporting operations like creating repositories, issues, and commits.5-
- 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.305 npmISC
TDQS
Scored across 21 tools
Each tool targets a distinct resource or action, with clear documentation differentiating similar tools like add_comment and add_comment_on_pr. No overlapping purposes that would cause agent misselection.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., create_branch, list_issues, merge_pr). The pattern is predictable and uniform across the entire set.
With 21 tools, the count is slightly above the ideal 3-15 range but justified by the broad domain of Gitea repository management. The tools cover a comprehensive set of operations without being excessive.
The tool surface covers core CRUD for issues and PRs but has notable gaps: no update for PRs, no delete operations for any resource, and no management tools for labels or milestones. Some gaps are acknowledged as out of scope, but the set is not fully comprehensive.