code-quality-mcp
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| analyze_projectC | Analyze project type and code quality |
| check_qualityC | Check code quality based on project type. Supports both fast (logic-based) and deep (AI-powered) analysis modes. |
| get_recommendationsC | Get code quality recommendations |
| get_smart_summaryB | Get a concise, actionable summary of code quality instead of full issue list |
| get_quick_winsB | Get high-impact, low-effort fixes to quickly improve code quality score |
| get_trendsA | See how code quality is improving or degrading over time |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 6 tools
analyze_project and check_quality overlap in purpose, both analyzing project type and quality. The get_recommendations, get_smart_summary, and get_quick_wins tools are related but distinct in output style, so disambiguation is moderate.
All tool names consistently follow a verb_noun pattern (analyze_project, check_quality, get_recommendations, etc.). The use of get_ for most retrieval functions is uniform and predictable.
Six tools is within the ideal 3-15 range for a focused code-quality server. Each tool addresses a specific aspect of the domain without bloat.
The tool set covers analysis, quality checking, recommendations, summaries, quick wins, and trends, providing a comprehensive view of code quality. Missing a raw issue list or fix application is a minor gap, but agents can work around it via the existing tools.