no_human
概览
作者提供的说明(英文原文)
File a task with your local no_human and check on it: task_add and task_status over stdio.
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。
- 用户评价i暂无评价评价功能将在后续阶段与账户功能一起开放
- 我们的基础检查i1 项中通过 1 项依据公开信息检查;尚未扫描代码
- 使用情况i非常新↓ 44/周 · ★ –
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: 文档、表格与办公
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
- PyPI已安装 Python 的 uv(用于 uvx 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": {
"no-human": {
"command": "uvx",
"args": [
"no-human",
"mcp-serve"
]
}
}
}在终端中运行这条命令
claude mcp add no-human -- uvx no-human mcp-serve或者自己复制设置
粘贴到项目中的 .cursor/mcp.json,或 ~/.cursor/mcp.json
{
"mcpServers": {
"no-human": {
"command": "uvx",
"args": [
"no-human",
"mcp-serve"
]
}
}
}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。
或者自己复制设置
粘贴到项目中的 .vscode/mcp.json
{
"servers": {
"no-human": {
"type": "stdio",
"command": "uvx",
"args": [
"no-human",
"mcp-serve"
]
}
}
}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8日
- ✓ 通过
作者与仓库一致
注册名称已通过 GitHub 账户 no-human-ai 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“文档、表格与办公”中的其他服务器比较i
- 星标数多于此分类中其他 3577 个服务器的 0%
- 发布到注册中心的时间比此分类中其他 3577 个服务器的 37% 更新
- 基础检查结果等于或优于此分类中其他 3577 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
no_human 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(0.2.3)于2个月前进入注册中心。
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 Python (uv)。
有什么可以替代它?
同一分类中有:Agent-Native Calendar, Excel MCP Server, MCP Server for Excel
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:↓ 每周下载量i★ 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
Excel MCP Server
Create and edit Excel files with AI: charts, PivotTables, formulas. No Excel needed.
MCP Server for Excel
Excel automation for AI - Sheets, Power Query, DAX, VBA, Tables, Ranges and more. Windows only.
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。
no_human
From ticket to reviewed pull request. *Free and open-source, on your machine.*
English · 简体中文 · 日本語 · 한국어 · Español · Français · Deutsch · Português (Brasil)
getnohuman.com · Quickstart · Docs · Watch it work a sprint · Discord
▶ Watch the loop — a ticket in, a reviewed pull request out; the whole loop in 57 seconds.
The AI coding factory you can trust :
- A plan before any code, from the ticket plus what it finds in your repo. When planning fails, the coder is told it is working without one; when the change is judged trivial the plan is skipped without telling the coder, by design — the skip is still stated in the run's event stream.
- An adversarial review. A different model, in a session that never saw the coder's transcript, told to refute "done". You get a pass/fail checklist citing file and line — never a numeric self-score.
- A tamper guard. Deleted tests, new skips, an assertion turned into a tautology — counted mechanically before the review gate runs, then justified against your acceptance criteria or the attempt stops.
- Proof the fix fixed the bug. The tests offered as evidence must fail at the merge base and pass on the new tree — the reproduction gate runs both. Out of the box that binds a Python bug fix;
repro_gate.mode: requiredbinds every kind and every change. - Your tests run, locally and optionally through your CI — and a PR that found no test command says NOT RUN on its face.
- An honest stop. When it cannot finish it stops and says why — a specific question when your answer would unblock it, a structured record when it has simply run out of budget — never an invented plausible diff.
What the gate caught
no_human builds no_human. Over 65 days on its own board, none of this reached a pull request:
- 505 of 1,709 attempts the coder called done were sent back by the second model, each with a pass/fail checklist citing file and line.
- 44 attempts were stopped before the review even ran, for deleting or weakening a test.
- 46 bug-fix proofs were refused because the test offered as evidence passed on the old code too.
Install
One line (CLI + board)
uv tool install no-human # or: pipx install no-human — the wheel ships the board
nh init && nh doctor # token, config, first repo; then prove the install is real
Desktop app
Each release ships a SHA-256 alongside the artifact. Platform notes and the first-run walk-through: docs/quickstart.md.
From source
git clone https://github.com/no-human-ai/no_human.git && cd no_human
uv sync # installs the nh entry point into .venv (cd web && npm install && npm run build) # builds the board (cold first install can take minutes) uv run nh init # token, config, first repo (about 2 minutes) uv run nh doctor # verify the install is real before relying on it
The web build is not optional if you want the board: a source checkout ships no web/dist, so without it nh start serves the API only and renders no UI. Needs Python 3.12+, uv, git, and Node with npm for the board build.
Product highlights
A plan before any code Acceptance criteria you can check, written from the ticket and your repo.
An independent reviewer A second model that never saw the coder's session, told to refute "done". Pass or fail; every finding that blocks cites file and line.
Your tests, on the PR's face Run locally or through your CI. No test command found reads NOT RUN , never blank.
A tamper guard Deleted tests, new skips and tautological assertions are counted before review. Unjustified, the attempt stops.
Proof the fix fixed the bug The tests offered as evidence must fail on the old code and pass on the new. The gate runs both, and the event log shows the verdict.
An honest stop When it needs you, it parks with one specific question instead of guessing.
Your tracker's tickets, on your board Pick Jira or Linear tickets from the backlog (monday.com boards are polled). Each one is scoped with you before it starts.
Stills: the real board on a demo workload.
Run one task
Run nh with no arguments for the shell: your lanes, a live event tail, and an intake you describe a task to in plain English. Every command below still works.
nh # the shell
nh start # board + worker on 127.0.0.1:8420 nh task add https://github.com/org/repo/issues/42 --repo ~/git/repo nh status # needs-you / working / waiting / done nh review # the reviewer's evidence checklist nh diff # the diff it wants to ship nh approve # your approval squash-lands the PR (git.approve_identity) nh reject --reason "..." # send it back with feedback
Integrations
Point no_human at the tracker you already use and it pulls the tickets to your board — a tracker's filter lives in your config, never in a task's own text, and a transport error logs and retries on the next tick instead of crashing the pool.
| Tracker | How tickets arrive | Filter you configure |
|---|---|---|
| Jira Cloud | Polled via REST search/jql (HTTP Basic email:token) | integrations.jira.jql |
| Linear | Polled via the GraphQL API | integrations.linear.team_key + state_types + label |
| monday.com | Polled via GraphQL v2 | integrations.monday.board_id + status_column + todo_labels |
With write-back on (write_back, off by default), the ticket moves with the task — matched by status category, type, or the label you name, never a hard-coded transition id — and gets the PR link; a task that needs a human is commented on, never transitioned. GitHub and GitLab issues import as tasks by URL, and PRs or MRs open on your own host; Slack and Teams get a message when a task needs you; Jenkins and CircleCI can run your test layers and gate the loop. Setup for each: docs/adapters.md.
Watch the Jira flow end to end — tickets synced from a Jira board, scoped, implemented, and delivered as a review-passed pull request (click for the full video with every step):
▶️ Play the full demo — 1:33, from Jira board to review-passed PR
GitHub Action
Run the same adversarial reviewer and tamper guard as a pull-request check — one shot, no daemon, no ~/.no_human database, and not the queueing nh review CLI path. It judges the diff alone: unlike a local run, it collects no lint, wiring or type evidence and does not explore the repository. It posts a single pass/fail checklist comment with file:line citations, found by its own marker and updated in place on every run rather than creating a new one e
只显示了开头部分;其余内容请在仓库中阅读