Skip to main content
Glama
wu-yu-pei

mcp-terminal-share

by wu-yu-pei
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to mcp-terminal-share

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • set-agent-comm

      tatargabor
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables local agent-to-agent messaging between Claude Code sessions via file-based channels, with a registry, MCP tools and CLI for sending, reading, and tracking messages.
      2
      MIT

    • claude-intercom-mcp

      dataforxyz
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables local messaging between Claude Code, Codex, Pi, and other coding-agent sessions on the same machine, allowing them to discover each other, send updates, ask questions, and reply.
      8
      13 npm
      2
      AGPL 3.0

    • CC2CC

      non4me
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables file-based agent-to-agent communication between Claude Code instances on the same machine, using MCP channels and plain JSON files.
      4 npm
      14
      MIT

    • letterbox

      dovahkiin-v
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables real-time, file-based messaging between terminal AI agents (like Claude Code, Gemini CLI) allowing them to collaborate on tasks directly without a server or network, using JSON files and atomic rename for coordination.
      MIT

    • claudechat

      zzibo
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables Claude Code agents to communicate across sessions, terminals, and repositories through shared channels with persistent context.
      MIT
    Deploy Server
    One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

    TDQS

    A3.7/5.0

    Scored across 5 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool has a clear, non-overlapping purpose: registration, sending, listing, and two distinct reading methods (polling and blocking). No ambiguity.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (get_messages, list_terminals, register, send_message, watch_messages), making them predictable.

    Tool Count5/5

    With 5 tools covering the core operations of a terminal messaging service, the count is well-scoped and each tool earns its place.

    Completeness4/5

    The tool surface covers registration, sending, and two receive modes. A minor gap is the lack of an explicit unregister or delete functionality, but the core workflow is complete.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources