Which integrations are available for this server?

Allows retrieving and analyzing remote GitHub repositories directly, enabling AI agents to explore and understand public codebases outside the current workspace Supports outputting codebase analysis in Markdown format for better readability and documentation purposes Mentioned as an example repository that can be analyzed using the remote codebase feature to understand specific components like testing frameworks Enables formatting codebase output as XML, providing structured representation of code for further processing or analysis

How do I use Codebase MCP?

1. Click on "Install Server". 2. Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state. 3. In the chat, type @ followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@Codebase MCP analyze my current project and explain its main components" That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed. Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.

en es ja ko zh

Codebase MCP

by DeDeveloper23

Overview Schema Related Servers Score Discussions

TypeScript

Hybrid

Codebase MCP

A Model Context Protocol (MCP) server implementation that provides tools to retrieve and analyze entire codebases using RepoMix.

This MCP allows AI Agents like Cursor's Composer Agent to automatically read and understand entire codebases at once, making it easier for developers to work with large codebases and for AI assistants to have comprehensive context of a project.

Features

📚 Codebase Retrieval: Retrieve the entire codebase as a single text output in different formats (XML, Markdown, Plain)
🌐 Remote Repository Support: Process remote GitHub repositories directly
💾 File Saving: Save the processed codebase to a file
🔧 Customizable Options: Control how the codebase is processed with various options (comments, line numbers, file summaries, etc.)

Related MCP server: CodeAlive MCP

Installation

From NPM (Recommended)

# Install the package globally
npm install -g codebase-mcp

# Install RepoMix (required dependency)
codebase-mcp install

From GitHub

# Clone the repository
git clone https://github.com/DeDeveloper23/codebase-mcp.git

# Navigate to the project directory
cd codebase-mcp

# Install dependencies
npm install

# Build the project
npm run build

# Install globally
npm install -g .

# Install RepoMix (required dependency)
codebase-mcp install

Integration with Cursor

To use this MCP with Cursor's Composer Agent:

Open Cursor IDE
Click the Composer icon in the sidebar
Click the "MCP Servers" button at the top
Click "Add new MCP server"
Fill in the details:
- Name: Codebase MCP (or any name you prefer)
- Type: command
- Command: codebase-mcp start
Click "Add" to save

Once added, the MCP will provide three powerful tools to the Composer Agent:

Available Tools

getCodebase
- Purpose: Analyzes your current workspace/project
- Use when: You want the AI to understand your entire codebase
- Example prompt: "Please analyze my codebase to understand its structure"
getRemoteCodebase
- Purpose: Fetches and analyzes any public GitHub repository
- Use when: You want to explore or understand other projects
- Example prompt: "Can you analyze the repository at github.com/username/repo?"
saveCodebase
- Purpose: Saves the codebase analysis to a file for later use
- Use when: You want to preserve the codebase snapshot or share it
- Example prompt: "Save an analysis of this codebase to review later"

Example Usage in Cursor

Here are some example prompts you can use with the Composer Agent:

"Analyze my current project and explain its main components."

"Can you look at the tensorflow/tensorflow repository and explain how their testing framework works?"

"Save an analysis of my project to 'codebase-analysis.md' in markdown format."

The Composer Agent will automatically use the appropriate tool based on your request.

Usage Outside Cursor

Starting the MCP Server

codebase-mcp start

This will start the MCP server in stdio mode, which can be used by any MCP-compatible clients.

License

MIT

Available Tools

3 tools

getCodebaseC

Retrieve the entire codebase as a single text output using RepoMix

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`cwd`	No	Current working directory of the codebase (defaults to current dir)
`format`	No	Output format (xml, markdown, or plain)	xml
`ignorePatterns`	No	Ignore patterns (using glob patterns, comma-separated)
`includeDirectoryStructure`	No	Include directory structure
`includeFileSummary`	No	Include summary of each file
`includePatterns`	No	Include patterns (using glob patterns, comma-separated)
`removeComments`	No	Remove comments from the code
`removeEmptyLines`	No	Remove empty lines from the code
`showLineNumbers`	No	Show line numbers

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states it retrieves code as text. It lacks critical behavioral details: whether this is a read-only operation, potential performance impacts for large codebases, authentication needs, or output format specifics beyond 'single text output'.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Single sentence, front-loaded with core purpose, zero wasted words. It efficiently conveys the essential action without unnecessary elaboration.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a complex tool with 9 parameters and no annotations or output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain the output structure, performance considerations, or error handling, leaving significant gaps for agent understanding.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all 9 parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond implying retrieval scope ('entire codebase'), maintaining the baseline score for high schema coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('entire codebase'), specifying it outputs as 'single text output using RepoMix'. It distinguishes from 'saveCodebase' (write vs. read) but not explicitly from 'getRemoteCodebase' (local vs. remote retrieval).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention 'getRemoteCodebase' for remote codebases or 'saveCodebase' for saving output, leaving the agent to infer usage from tool names alone.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

getRemoteCodebaseC

Retrieve a remote repository's codebase as a single text output using RepoMix

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`format`	No	Output format (xml, markdown, or plain)	xml
`ignorePatterns`	No	Ignore patterns (using glob patterns, comma-separated)
`includeDirectoryStructure`	No	Include directory structure
`includeFileSummary`	No	Include summary of each file
`includePatterns`	No	Include patterns (using glob patterns, comma-separated)
`removeComments`	No	Remove comments from the code
`removeEmptyLines`	No	Remove empty lines from the code
`repo`	Yes	GitHub repository URL or shorthand format (e.g., 'username/repo')
`showLineNumbers`	No	Show line numbers

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but lacks critical behavioral details. It mentions output is 'a single text output' but doesn't disclose size limits, rate limits, authentication needs, error handling, or what 'RepoMix' entails. For a tool with 9 parameters and no annotations, this is insufficient.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose without wasted words. Every part earns its place by specifying retrieval, resource, output format, and method.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a complex tool with 9 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain the return structure, potential errors, or behavioral constraints, leaving significant gaps for the agent to operate effectively.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond implying the tool handles remote repositories via 'repo', which aligns with the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Retrieve') and resource ('remote repository's codebase'), specifying it returns 'a single text output using RepoMix'. It distinguishes from sibling 'getCodebase' by emphasizing 'remote' and 'RepoMix', but doesn't explicitly contrast with 'saveCodebase'.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings 'getCodebase' or 'saveCodebase'. The description implies usage for remote repositories but doesn't specify alternatives or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer context.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

saveCodebaseC

Save the codebase to a file using RepoMix

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`cwd`	No	Current working directory of the codebase (defaults to current dir)
`format`	No	Output format (xml, markdown, or plain)	xml
`ignorePatterns`	No	Ignore patterns (using glob patterns, comma-separated)
`includeDirectoryStructure`	No	Include directory structure
`includeFileSummary`	No	Include summary of each file
`includePatterns`	No	Include patterns (using glob patterns, comma-separated)
`outputFile`	No	Output file path	repomix-output.txt
`removeComments`	No	Remove comments from the code
`removeEmptyLines`	No	Remove empty lines from the code
`showLineNumbers`	No	Show line numbers

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states 'Save' which implies a write operation, but doesn't specify file system permissions, whether it overwrites existing files, error handling, or output format details. The mention of 'RepoMix' adds some context but lacks operational specifics needed for a mutation tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that gets straight to the point. It uses minimal words to convey the core functionality without any fluff or redundant information. Every word earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a mutation tool with 10 parameters and no annotations or output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, error conditions, or important behavioral aspects like file overwriting. The high parameter count and mutation nature require more contextual information than provided.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, providing comprehensive parameter documentation. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema. According to scoring rules, when schema coverage is high (>80%), the baseline is 3 even with no param info in description.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Save') and resource ('codebase to a file') with the specific tool 'RepoMix'. It distinguishes from sibling tools 'getCodebase' and 'getRemoteCodebase' by indicating a save/write operation rather than retrieval. However, it doesn't specify what exactly gets saved (e.g., entire codebase, filtered content).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention sibling tools or any contextual cues for choosing this over 'getCodebase' or 'getRemoteCodebase'. It's a standalone statement with no usage context.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Tool Schema Changelog

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

3 tool updatesv1.0.0Aug 15, 2025
- First observedgetCodebase
- First observedgetRemoteCodebase
- First observedsaveCodebase

Install Server

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

The three tools have distinct purposes: retrieving local codebase, retrieving remote codebase, and saving codebase. While 'getCodebase' and 'getRemoteCodebase' both retrieve code, the local/remote distinction is clear. There's minor potential confusion about whether 'saveCodebase' saves the local or remote version, but overall boundaries are well-defined.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with camelCase styling: getCodebase, getRemoteCodebase, saveCodebase. The naming is predictable and follows the same grammatical structure throughout, making it easy for agents to understand the action-object relationship.

Tool Count3/5

With only 3 tools, this feels quite minimal for a 'Codebase MCP' server. While the tools cover basic retrieval and saving operations, the scope seems limited - there are no tools for searching, analyzing, modifying, or managing codebase components. The count is borderline thin for what could be expected from a codebase management system.

Completeness2/5

For a codebase management server, there are significant gaps in functionality. The tools only provide retrieval and saving operations using RepoMix, but lack any tools for code analysis, search, modification, version control operations, or component management. This creates a dead-end surface where agents can only get and save entire codebases without any ability to work with code meaningfully.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive

ResponsivenessSyncing

Resources

Need Help?

Reddit Discussion

Related Servers

Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.

Looking for Admin?

If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.

Related MCP Connectors

hithereiamaliff-mcp-nextcloudOAuth
ai.smithery
A comprehensive Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that enables AI assistants to interact with yo…
Cloud Storage File Systems Workplace & Productivity
237
gread A
io.github.NitroRCr
An MCP server that gives your AI access to the source code and docs of all public github repos
Version Control Code Analysis Documentation Access
5361
searchcode A
com.searchcode
Code intelligence for LLMs. Analyze, search, and retrieve code from any public git repository.
Search Code Analysis Version Control
62
Cortex C
io.cortex.mcp
The Cortex MCP server provides read-only access to real-time engineering context from the Cortex developer portal, allowing AI coding assistants to answer natural language questions about your organization's catalog (microservices, libraries, domains, teams, infrastructure), scorecards (engineering standards and best practices), initiatives (goals and deadlines), and Engineering Intelligence metrics. It includes tools for querying documentation, tracking personal entities, and accessing AI-assisted insights across the entire Cortex ecosystem.
Developer Tools Monitoring Observability
312

Related MCP Servers

code-index-mcp
Code Analysis Developer Tools Search
johnhuang316
A
license
A
quality
A
maintenance
A Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that helps large language models index, search, and analyze code repositories with minimal setup
Updated a month ago (2026-07-27 08:14 UTC)
14
1,005
MIT
CodeAlive MCPofficial
Code Analysis RAG Systems Developer Tools
CodeAlive-AI
A
license
Not graded
quality
A
maintenance
A Model Context Protocol server that enhances AI agents by providing deep semantic understanding of codebases, enabling more intelligent interactions through advanced code search and contextual awareness.
Updated 21 days ago (2026-08-16 13:58 UTC)
89
MIT
CodeCompass MCP
TheAlchemist6
A
license
A
quality
D
maintenance
An enterprise-grade Model Context Protocol server that provides comprehensive GitHub repository analysis and AI-powered development assistance through 11 streamlined tools.
Updated a year ago (2025-07-18 02:46 UTC)
11
2
MIT
Local Project Sync
Code Analysis Developer Tools
xueshanisusan
F
license
B
quality
D
maintenance
A Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that enables AI applications to access and analyze local code repositories without manual uploads, providing file listing, content reading, code searching, and project structure analysis capabilities.
Updated a year ago (2025-07-31 19:47 UTC)
7
-

Appeared in Searches

Latest Blog Posts

Who's Calling? MCP Hosts Are an Identity Blind Spot (And the Spec Knows It)
By Om-Shree-0709 on July 25, 2026.
mcp
Agent Identity
OAuth 2.1
Your AI Chatbot Just Exposed Your CEO's Salary to an Intern
By Om-Shree-0709 on July 2, 2026.
Agent Identity
MCP Security
OAuth Delegation
Why MCP Servers Need Execution Sandboxing (And Why Your Current Stack Isn't Enough)
By Om-Shree-0709 on June 30, 2026.
Agentic Ai
Prompt Injection
WebAssembly

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/DeDeveloper23/codebase-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server

Codebase MCP

Features

Installation

From NPM (Recommended)

From GitHub

Integration with Cursor

Available Tools

Example Usage in Cursor

Usage Outside Cursor

Starting the MCP Server

License

Available Tools

TDQS

TDQS

TDQS

Tool Schema Changelog

TDQS

Maintenance

Resources

Looking for Admin?

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

code-index-mcp

CodeAlive MCPofficial

CodeCompass MCP

Local Project Sync

Appeared in Searches

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API