A
licenseNot graded
qualityA
maintenanceA second opinion on your decisions, from a different AI company than the one you think with.
45 npm
1
MIT
Claude-codex-coop
by youagainchen
Related Servers
Alternatives to Claude-codex-coop
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables two local LLMs (Qwen and Llama) to communicate via MCP, allowing one model to consult the other for second opinions or additional reasoning.1-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables AI-to-AI consultation for critical thinking and complex reasoning via OpenRouter, allowing one AI to delegate tasks to another AI model.10MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceLets your AI assistant consult assistants from other vendors under your own subscriptions, track costs, and cross-examine answers across models to surface disagreements and open points.3 npmMIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceEnables multi-model LLM council reviews and parallel sidecar conversations within Claude, allowing Claude to orchestrate structured reviews from various AI models and fold their responses back into the session.745 npm2MIT
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceMulti-AI Consensus Tool: Query multiple AI models in parallel, synthesize responses for better accuracy, and reduce AI bias through ensemble decision-making.133MIT
TDQS
A3.5/5.0
Scored across 15 tools
Disambiguation4/5
The start_* tools represent distinct workflows (workflow, consultation, debate, implementation), and the setup/status tools are mostly distinct. However, set_collaboration_mode and start_workflow both concern handing off work to the partner AI, and start_consultation vs start_model_debate could be confused without reading descriptions carefully.
Naming Consistency4/5
Tool names are consistently snake_case and mostly follow a verb_noun pattern such as get_model_catalog, set_partner_preferences, and start_workflow. A few names break the pattern (health_check, project_status) but overall the convention is predictable.
Tool Count5/5
At 15 tools, the set is within the expected range for a collaboration-orchestration server and each tool appears to serve a distinct role in setup, execution, or monitoring. No obvious redundant or filler tools are present.
Completeness4/5
The surface covers setup, model selection, workflow starts, status polling, run listing, usage summaries, and implementation runs. A notable gap is the lack of an explicit cancel/stop tool for background collaboration runs, which could leave agents unable to abort a running task.
Maintenance
ActivityMaintained
ResponsivenessNo issues