Skip to main content
Glama

Server Details

Codex run receipts your reviewer can trust.

If you are the author of this connector, you can claim ownership with GitHub, an HTTP challenge, or a DNS record. Claimed connector authors can inspect health checks, view analytics, and manage their listing.
Status
Unhealthy
Last Tested
Transport
Streamable HTTP
URL
Repository
clauxel/codex-run-ledger-mcp
GitHub Stars
0
Server Listing
CodexRun Ledger MCP

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. 4 tool updates
    • First observedcreate_run_receipt
    • First observedexport_client_handoff
    • First observedlist_missing_evidence
    • First observedsummarize_scope

Frequently Asked Questions

Discussions

No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

  • A
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    B
    maintenance
    Enables coding agents to request, track, and verify independent cross-model reviews with structured findings, attachment hashes, and provenance receipts via Chrome Bridge, Codex, or Responses transports.
    MIT
  • A
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    A
    maintenance
    Codexa is a local change-evidence layer for software workflows, providing committed-change receipts, plan conformance, and verification crediting. It acts as an MCP server to help agents reason about code changes and verify correctness.
    166
    2
    MIT
Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

C2.3/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a distinct verb and noun combination (create, export, list, summarize) with no overlap in purpose. An agent can easily distinguish between creating a receipt, exporting a handoff, listing missing evidence, and summarizing scope.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., create_run_receipt, export_client_handoff). The naming is predictable and adheres to a single convention.

Tool Count4/5

With 4 tools, the set is slightly small but appropriate for a focused ledger management server. Each tool serves a distinct function without unnecessary complexity.

Completeness4/5

The tools cover core operations (create, export, list, summarize) for the ledger domain. However, missing update or delete operations for receipts or evidence could be a minor gap in lifecycle coverage.