Context7
Up-to-date docs for AI agents
제작자가 쓴 설명(영어 원문)
Your own memory inside ChatGPT and Claude, with the source of every note.
이 세 가지는 절대 하나의 점수로 합치지 않아요. 의견, 측정, 인기는 서로 다른 것이니까요.
이 서버는 아직 쉬운 말로 된 요약을 쓰지 못했어요. 아래는 레지스트리에서 읽어 온 사실이에요.
쓰고 있는 AI 앱을 고른 다음 설정을 복사하세요.
필요한 것
어떤 앱을 쓰세요?
위에서 앱을 고르세요. 기억해 두었다가 다음부터는 버튼에 “…에 설치”라고 표시해요.
웹, 데스크톱, 모바일의 Claude에서 쓸 수 있어요:
https://app.memorybrain.ai/mcp터미널에서 이 명령어를 실행하세요
claude mcp add --transport http memorybrain https://app.memorybrain.ai/mcp프로젝트의 .cursor/mcp.json 또는 ~/.cursor/mcp.json에 붙여 넣으세요
{
"mcpServers": {
"memorybrain": {
"url": "https://app.memorybrain.ai/mcp"
}
}
}브라우저가 앱을 열지 물어본 다음, 앱이 설정을 보여 주고 확인을 요청해요. 키 값은 비워 두니 직접 입력하세요.
프로젝트의 .vscode/mcp.json에 붙여 넣으세요
{
"servers": {
"memorybrain": {
"type": "http",
"url": "https://app.memorybrain.ai/mcp"
}
}
}브라우저가 앱을 열지 물어본 다음, 앱이 설정을 보여 주고 확인을 요청해요. 키 값은 비워 두니 직접 입력하세요.
ChatGPT는 인터넷에 있는 서버에만 연결할 수 있어요:
https://app.memorybrain.ai/mcp메뉴 이름은 요금제나 시기에 따라 조금 다를 수 있어요.
선택한 앱은 이 기기의 쿠키에만 저장돼요. 계정은 필요 없어요.
이 설정은 제작자의 레지스트리 정보로 만들었어요. README와 다르면 README를 따르세요.
서버가 도구 목록을 보여 주기 전에 로그인을 요구해요.
누구나 볼 수 있는 정보를 점검했고, 코드는 읽지 않았어요. 해당하지 않는 항목은 개수에서 뺐어요. · 2026년 11월 8일 점검
레지스트리 이름이 도메인 memorybrain.ai 기준으로 확인되었어요(레지스트리가 도메인 소유를 확인해요)
아직 GitHub에서 이 저장소를 읽어 오지 않았어요
아직 GitHub에서 이 저장소를 읽어 오지 않았어요
89ms 만에 응답(HTTP 401)
OAuth 로그인을 지원한다고 밝혀서, AI 앱이 로그인 화면으로 안내해 줘요
아직 점검하지 않았어요. 엔드포인트를 점검할 때 도구 목록을 읽어요
레지스트리에서 이 카테고리의 활성 서버 전체와 비교했어요. 스타는 게시자가 저장소를 소유한 경우에만 세요.
해당하는 기본 점검 3개 중 3개를 통과했어요. 코드는 읽지 않았어요. 키나 토큰을 넣기 전에 서버가 어떤 권한을 요구하는지 확인하고, 꼭 필요한 권한만 있는 키를 쓰세요.
레지스트리에 필수 키가 나와 있지 않아요. 다만 처음 쓸 때 로그인을 요구하는 서버도 있어요.
제작자의 클라우드에서 실행돼요. 설치 없이 인터넷으로 연결하지만, 보내는 내용은 제작자의 서버를 거쳐요.
GitHub 저장소는 마지막으로 – 변경됐고, 최신 버전(0.9.0)은 오늘 레지스트리에 올라왔어요.
Claude Desktop, Claude Code, Cursor, VS Code처럼 MCP를 지원하는 앱에서 쓸 수 있어요. URL로 연결되기 때문에, 원격 MCP 서버를 지원하는 앱(예: 개발자 모드의 ChatGPT)에서도 쓸 수 있어요.
같은 카테고리에는: Context7, Codebase Memory, Exa
같은 카테고리에서 다른 제작자가 만든 서버예요. 스타 순으로 정렬했어요.
카드 보는 법:★ GitHub 스타i세 기둥: 리뷰 · 점검 · 사용 정도i업데이트 = 최신 버전을 레지스트리에 공개한 날i
Up-to-date docs for AI agents
Codebase knowledge graph for AI agents — 162 languages, sub-ms queries, 99% fewer tokens.
Connect AI agents to Exa for web search, content fetching, and multi-step research.
제작자의 저장소에서 쓰인 그대로 가져왔어요. PopNx MCP가 검토하거나 보증한 내용이 아니에요. HTML, 이미지, 스크립트는 제거했어요. 링크를 누르면 이 사이트를 벗어나요.
Open Brain is an opinionated framework for building and maintaining personal knowledge vaults that stay useful as they scale. It addresses the core problem most PKM systems ignore: notes don't just need to be captured — they need to be found, connected, kept alive, tested, and turned into output.
[MemoryBrain](https://memorybrain.ai) is built on Open Brain. Open Brain defines how a brain is built; MemoryBrain is where it lives inside your AIs (ChatGPT and Claude, through a remote MCP connector). The skills are listed at memorybrain.ai/openbrain/skills.
Most knowledge management systems work well at 50 notes. At 500, search gets noisy. At 2,000+, the vault becomes a graveyard of ideas you know you wrote down but can't surface when you need them. And at every scale, without active recall and deliberate output, the knowledge never becomes skill.
Open Brain addresses this with a structured approach across eight modules — from first capture through to written thinking and system automation. The repo has two parts:
Some parts of the framework are practices you run by hand rather than features a skill runs for you — publishing, measuring how much your vault improves an output, and mining your own sessions for automation. The docs say so where it applies.
example-vault/ is a small vault: 33 notes built from two invented books. Everything in it is fictional. It contains six deliberately seeded defects, so you can see what the engines catch and what they miss. You don't need a vault of your own or Claude Code: only Python 3.9+.
git clone https://github.com/Memory-brain/open-brain.git
cd open-brain pip install pyyaml # optional; without it one informational check reports 0 python3 engines/health-engine/health_check.py self-test bash example-vault/run-demo.sh
run-demo.sh copies the vault to a temporary directory, runs five engines there and deletes the copy afterwards, so nothing is written into the repo. The five engines are autolink (typed graph), the health check, the enrich scan, a one-hop graph retrieval and the eval. The excerpt below is real output from 2026-10-14, trimmed: … marks a cut, and checks that reported 0 are left out of the summary.
== 1. Autolink: index the vault and build the typed graph ==
✅ Indexed 33 notes → entities.json ✅ Wrote 130 edges → graph.jsonl … 🔖 Index edges (frontmatter): 97 🎯 Signal/noise ratio: 54.5% (18/33 non-trivial claim edges)
== 2. Health check (deterministic checks) == "summary": { "Orphan Notes": 1, "Unprocessed Inbox (>30d)": 1, "Contradiction Scan": 1, "skill_sequence Adoption & Signal": 3, "PN Provenance (resolved sources:)": 1, "Description as Claim, Not Label": 2, … -- details of the checks that fired -- [1] Orphan Notes: count=1 items: ["Small teams beat large teams on ambiguous work"] [5] Unprocessed Inbox (>30d): count=1 items: [{"note": "The Quiet Standup", "days": 63, "rating": 3}] [12] Contradiction Scan: count=1 items: [{"a": "A new routine sticks when it is small enough to run on a bad day", "b": "Judge a practice by its weekly review, not by its daily streak", "type": "contradice", …}] [16] Search Term Crowding: count=0 yellow_top: [{"term": "Habit Formation", "tag_count": 12, "tier": "flat", "threshold": 20, …}] [36] PN Provenance (resolved sources:): count=1 single_author_items: [{"pn": "Small teams beat large teams on ambiguous work", "author": "dov hartigan", "sources": 2}] [46] Description as Claim, Not Label: count=2 topic_not_claim: {"total": 1, "sample": ["Literature Notes/TF - A fixed weekly rhythm makes a small team pred"]}
== 3. Enrich scan (notes under 3 specific, resolvable search terms) == "under_threshold": [ { "note": "SL - A broken streak predicts dropout more than a missed day", "specific_resolvable": 2, … == 4. Retrieval: one-hop graph expansion from a seed note == Score Edge Type Dir Seed Neighbor 5.0 contradice → Judge a practice by its weekly review, n A new routine sticks when it is small enough to ru 1.0 refuerza → Judge a practice by its weekly review, n Team rituals need an owner and a cue, not just a c 1.0 refuerza ← Judge a practice by its weekly review, n Restarting an evening reading habit after a broken
== 5. Eval (L1 metrics across six dimensions) == "integrity": { "frontmatter_compliance_pct": 100.0, … "broken_links": 0, "orphan_pns": 1, … "graph": { "total_edges": 130, "total_entities": 33, "edges_per_entity": 3.94, "signal_noise_ratio_pct": 54.5, … "pipeline": { "inbox_total": 3, "inbox_stale_30d": 1,
Of the six seeded defects, four are caught and one is caught only in part:
Habit Formation. It shows up in the yellow band (12 notes), but the check's count stays 0 because a flat term only counts as red above 20 notes.example-vault/README.md lists each defect, where it is and which check is expected to catch it. Edge types in the graph keep their original Spanish identifiers: contradice = contradicts, refuerza = reinforces, extiende = extends.
The foundation. Addresses the three failures that compound as a vault grows: notes becoming unfindable, search terms losing discriminative power, and knowledge connections carrying no semantic meaning.
Problems:
Solution:
How raw sources — books, articles, PDFs, web content — become atomic, structured notes. The quality of extraction determines the quality of everything downstream. Includes both passive extraction (from sources you read) and active research (filling gaps you identify).
Problems:
layer field on Permanent Notes)Solutions:
How captured notes become your own ideas. The promotion process that separates storage from understanding.
Problems:
Solutions:
How knowledge becomes skill. The practice layer that closes the gap between understanding and doing.
Problems:
Solutions:
How to access what you know — in multiple modes, for different purposes, from any context.
Problems:
Solution:
How to keep a
앞부분만 보여 드려요. 나머지는 저장소에서 읽어 보세요