原型 · 预览版:收录官方注册中心里的全部服务器,每 30 分钟同步一次。评价和账户功能将在后续阶段推出。
PopNx MCP为使用 AI 的人准备的 MCP 服务器 · 用大白话讲清楚

Agent Lsp

作者:blackwell-systems版本 0.24.2i★ –i在你的电脑上运行
注册名称io.github.blackwell-systems/agent-lsp

安装

概览

作者提供的说明(英文原文)

Language servers as 66 code-intelligence tools for AI agents, CI-verified on 32 languages.

PopNx MCP 的三大支柱

这三项永远不会合并成一个分数:意见、测量和人气是不同的东西。

它能帮你做什么

我们还没有为它写通俗的介绍。下面是我们从注册中心读取到的事实。

  • 连接方式: 在你的电脑上运行
  • 传输方式: stdio
  • 分类: 其他

安装

选择你使用的 AI 应用,然后复制设置。

安装之前

  • 基础检查:1 项中通过 1 项
  • 在你的电脑上运行,拥有你的用户账户的权限(文件、网络、应用)。
  • 注册中心没有列出需要填写的密钥。

你需要

  • npm已安装 Node.js(用于 npx 命令)

你用的是哪个应用?

在上方选择你的应用。我们会记住它,下次按钮会显示“安装到 …”。

打开 Claude Desktop → Settings → Developer → Edit Config,把下面的内容粘贴到 claude_desktop_config.json

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "agent-lsp": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@blackwell-systems/agent-lsp"
      ]
    }
  }
}

在终端中运行这条命令

claude mcp add agent-lsp -- npx -y @blackwell-systems/agent-lsp

在 Cursor 中打开

或者自己复制设置

粘贴到项目中的 .cursor/mcp.json,或 ~/.cursor/mcp.json

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "agent-lsp": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@blackwell-systems/agent-lsp"
      ]
    }
  }
}

浏览器会先询问是否打开应用,然后应用会显示设置并请你确认。密钥的值会留空,由你自己填写。

在 VS Code 中打开

或者自己复制设置

粘贴到项目中的 .vscode/mcp.json

{
  "servers": {
    "agent-lsp": {
      "type": "stdio",
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@blackwell-systems/agent-lsp"
      ]
    }
  }
}

浏览器会先询问是否打开应用,然后应用会显示设置并请你确认。密钥的值会留空,由你自己填写。

这个服务器在你的电脑上运行,而 ChatGPT 只能连接互联网上的服务器。请选择其他应用。

你的选择通过 Cookie 保存在这台设备上,无需账户。

这些设置是根据作者在注册中心的条目生成的。如果 README 的写法不同,请以 README 为准。

它能做什么

它在你的电脑上运行;安装后,工具列表会显示在你的 AI 应用中。

基础检查i

我们检查的是任何人都能看到的信息;我们没有阅读代码。不适用的检查项不计入总数。 · 检查于 2026年11月7日

  • ✓ 通过

    作者与仓库一致

    注册名称已通过 GitHub 账户 blackwell-systems 验证,该账户拥有此仓库

  • … 尚未检查

    仍在维护

    我们还没有从 GitHub 读取这个仓库

  • … 尚未检查

    有许可证

    我们还没有从 GitHub 读取这个仓库

  • – 不适用

    端点有响应

    它在你的电脑上运行,没有互联网端点

  • – 不适用

    使用 OAuth 登录

    在你的电脑上运行,改用本地设置

  • … 尚未检查

    工具描述中没有隐藏指令

    它在你的电脑上运行;我们只能读取互联网端点的工具列表

与“其他”中的其他服务器比较i

  • 星标数多于此分类中其他 32725 个服务器的 0%
  • 发布到注册中心的时间比此分类中其他 32725 个服务器的 91% 更新
  • 基础检查结果等于或优于此分类中其他 32725 个服务器的 100%

与注册中心里这个分类中所有活跃的服务器比较。只有当发布者拥有该仓库时,星标数才计入。

常见问题

Agent Lsp 安全吗?

它在 1 项适用的基础检查中通过了 1 项。我们没有阅读代码。在添加密钥或令牌之前,请先看看这个服务器要求哪些权限,并使用只具备所需权限的密钥。

它需要哪些密钥或代码?

注册中心没有列出必需的密钥,不过有些服务器会在首次使用时要求你登录。

它在我的电脑上运行还是在云端?

它在你的电脑上运行。你的 AI 应用会在需要时启动它,数据不会经过作者的服务器(除非它自己调用在线服务)。

它还在维护吗?

GitHub 仓库最后更新于–,最新版本(0.24.2)于3天前进入注册中心。

哪些应用可以使用它?

支持 MCP 的应用,例如 Claude Desktop、Claude Code、Cursor 和 VS Code。你的电脑上还需要有 Node.js。

有什么可以替代它?

同一分类中有:Spec Driven Development, Remote Desktop Commander, Signoff

替代选择

同一分类中其他作者的服务器,按星标数排序。

如何看卡片:★ GitHub 星标i三大支柱:评价 · 检查 · 使用情况i更新 = 最新版本发布到注册中心的时间i

Spec Driven Development

作者:formulahendry

MCP Server that facilitates spec-driven development workflows, not just Vibe Coding.

在你的电脑上运行★ 440MIT14个月前更新
安装

Remote Desktop Commander

作者:desktop-commander

Remote Desktop Commander: use files, terminal and processes on your own computers from any AI app.

在云端运行★ 211前天更新
安装

Signoff

作者:ayuanxx-max

Five gates that make an agent's 'done' provable: run them, read the verdict, audit the record.

在你的电脑上运行今天更新
安装

作者的 README

打开 README

按原文从作者的仓库复制。PopNx MCP 没有审查或背书其内容。HTML、图片和脚本已被移除。链接会离开本站。

English · 简体中文 · Русский · हिन्दी · العربية

Code intelligence infrastructure for AI agents. 66 tools, 32 CI-verified languages, 24 agent workflows. Single Go binary.

curl -fsSL https://raw.githubusercontent.com/blackwell-systems/agent-lsp/main/install.sh | sh && agent-lsp init

What is it?

agent-lsp is an MCP server that orchestrates existing LSP servers (gopls, rust-analyzer, jdtls, etc.) into agent-native workflows.

Not an LSP server — it's an orchestration layer that manages language servers and exposes batch operations, speculative editing, and multi-step workflows via MCP tools.

Architecture:

  • Language servers (gopls, rust-analyzer, etc.) → provide code intelligence
  • agent-lsp (MCP server) → orchestrates workflows, maintains warm runtime
  • AI agents → consume via MCP protocol

Why agent-lsp?

Persistent warm runtime Language servers stay indexed across agent sessions. First session: indexes workspace (~10s for typical projects). Subsequent sessions: instant. No cold-start penalty on each request.

Batch operations blast_radius → one call returns all exports + all callers (test vs non-test partitioned). Without orchestration: 20+ sequential LSP calls.

Speculative editing simulate_edit → preview changes in memory, check diagnostic delta, apply or discard. Test edits before touching disk. safe_apply_edit writes only an edit it could verify: if the preview timed out or the server was still indexing, nothing is written.

Workflow orchestration 24 skills that chain LSP operations into complete pipelines:

  • /lsp-refactor → impact analysis → preview → apply → verify build → run tests
  • /lsp-safe-edit → preview → diagnostic diff → apply if safe
  • /lsp-verify → LSP diagnostics → build → test suite

Multi-language, single session One agent-lsp process routes .go to gopls, .ts to tsserver, .py to pyright. No reconfiguration between projects. Session persists across files and repositories. Workspace-wide queries (find_symbol, get_server_capabilities) ask every running language server, not just the default one. start_lsp can also connect to a language server that is already running (e.g. gopls -listen) and reuse its warm index.

[!TIP]

Token-optimized output: Tool responses encoded in GCF instead of JSON. 30-84% fewer tokens depending on tool (up to 92.7% with session dedup). 100% LLM comprehension on every frontier model, 91.2% on complex code graphs where JSON averages 54.1%. See below for measured savings per tool.

How the pieces fit together: LSP (Language Server Protocol) is how editors get code intelligence: completions, diagnostics, go-to-definition. MCP (Model Context Protocol) is the standard way AI tools like Claude Code discover and call external tools. agent-lsp bridges the two: language server intelligence, accessible to AI agents.

Use it when

  • Building agentic code generation systems
  • Automating refactors across large codebases
  • CI tooling that needs programmatic code intelligence
  • Any workflow where sequential LSP calls are too slow or complex
What agents say

We asked AI agents to evaluate agent-lsp across 10 coding tasks (find callers, rename safely, preview edits, detect dead code) and write an honest assessment. Four different models, four independent evaluations, same conclusion:

Claude (Opus 4.6): "I would recommend agent-lsp for any workflow involving refactoring, impact analysis, or safe editing. The standout tools are blast_radius (blast radius in one call, with test/non-test partitioning that would take 5-10 grep commands to replicate), go_to_implementation (type-checked interface satisfaction that grep simply cannot do), and the simulation session workflow (speculative type-checking without touching disk, which has no grep/read equivalent at all)."

Cursor (auto): "I would recommend agent-lsp for heavy refactors and code navigation because the rename, references, implementations, call hierarchy, and simulation tools remove a lot of brittle grep/manual-edit work and make changes safer."

GPT-5.5 (via Codex): "I would recommend agent-lsp for symbol-aware work: references, implementations, rename previews, diagnostics, and large-file structure are materially faster and less error-prone than grep/read loops."

Gemini 2.5 Pro (via Gemini CLI): "I would highly recommend agent-lsp because it provides a level of semantic awareness that standard text-searching tools simply cannot match. The ability to perform high-confidence renames, find interface implementations, and preview the diagnostic impact of edits without writing to disk significantly reduces the risk of introducing regressions."

Tested, not assumed

Every other MCP-LSP implementation lists supported languages in a config file. None of them run the actual language server in CI to verify it works.

agent-lsp CI runs 32 real language servers against real fixture codebases on every push, and all 32 pass end to end: Go, Python, TypeScript, Rust, Java, C, C++, C#, Ruby, PHP, Kotlin, Swift, Scala, Zig, Lua, Elixir, Gleam, Clojure, Dart, Terraform, Nix, Prisma, SQL, MongoDB, MQL, and more. When we say "works with gopls," that's a verified, automated claim, not a hope.

Speculative execution

Simulate changes in memory before writing to disk. No other MCP-LSP implementation has this.

preview_edit previews the diagnostic impact of any edit. You see exactly what breaks before the file is touched. simulate_chain evaluates a sequence of dependent edits (rename a function, update all callers, change the return type) and reports which step first introduces an error.

8 speculative execution tools. See docs/guide/speculative-execution.md for the full workflow.

Interactive refactoring

Some refactorings need answers before the language server can compute them: which struct tags to add and how to name them, which interface to implement, where a declaration should move. gopls v0.24 asks these questions through a new LSP extension (golang/go#76331), which editors show as dialogs. agent-lsp is a client for it built for agents: refactor returns the questions as a typed form (choices, defaults, a searchable list for the interface), the agent answers, and the server computes the edit. agent-lsp captures that edit before it is written, so dry_run previews it.

refactor(file, line, column)                          → available refactorings

refactor(..., action: "Add struct tags") → questions: tags (default "json"), naming style (camelCase, snake_case, ...) refactor(..., answers: {addTags: "json", transform: "snakecase"}) → applied

See refactor in the tool reference.

Token savings

Structured LSP responses use 5-34x fewer tokens than grep/read on the same tasks. On HashiCorp Consul (319K lines), a blast-radius analysis uses 17.7MB via grep vs 841KB via LSP, reducing 5,534 tool calls to 119. Savings scale with codebase size. See docs/guide/token-savings.md for the full experiment across five codebases.

Token-optimized output (GCF)

Tool responses are encoded in GCF (Graph Compact Format) instead of JSON. GCF eliminates field-name repetition, identifier repetition, and per-record structural overhead.

ProfileToolsSavings vs JSON
TabularOther structured results (find_references, diagnostics, detect_changes, ...)30-51%
Graphlist_symbols, find_symbol, blast_radius, find_callers, explore_symbol, type_hierarchy, get_cross_repo_references79-84%
Graph + session dedupSame, via gcf-proxy --session92.7% (5th call)

Workspace edits (rename and refactor previews) are always JSON, so they round-trip into apply_edit byte-exact. Grouped/nested responses (callers under a symbol, diagnostics with related info) tabularize too, for ~14% over JSON on that shape (details).

GCF is enabled by default. To revert to JSON:

export AGENT_LSP_OUTPUT_FORMAT=json

Benchmark: go run scripts/gcf-benchmark.go. See docs/guide/gcf-integration.md for architecture details.

GCF: gcformat.com · Spec · Go · Python · TypeScript · Playground

Why orchestration matters

AI agents make incorrect code changes because they can't see the full picture: who calls this function, what breaks if I rename it, does the build still pass. Language servers have the answers, but raw LSP tools require 20+ sequential calls and complex orchestration logic.

agent-lsp solves this by encoding correct multi-step operations into single calls and skills. blast_radius does what would take an agent 20+ calls in one. /lsp-refactor chains impact → preview → apply → verify → test without per-prompt orchestration.

Persistent daemon mode

Python and TypeScript projects need minutes of background indexing before find_references works. agent-lsp automatically spawns a persistent daemon broker that survives between sessions, so the workspace stays indexed. First session: daemon starts and indexes (~10s for FastAPI). Subsequent sessions: instant connection to the warm daemon. Auto-exits after 30 minutes of inactivity. Go, Rust, and other fast-indexing languages bypass this entirely (zero overhead).

Phase enforcement

Skills tell agents the correct order of operations. Phase enforcement makes the runtime *block* violations instead of trusting the agent to follow instructions.

When an agent activates a skill, every tool call is checked agains

只显示了开头部分;其余内容请在仓库中阅读

问 PopNx