MCP.Market

RLM Tools MCP server

by stefanoshea·io.github.stefanoshea/rlm-tools·v0.1.0·8 stars

Persistent Python sandbox for token-efficient codebase exploration in MCP clients

B75/100grade B
What users say
No reviews yet
Be the first
Safety scan
B75/100

full report

Adoption
New

8 stars11 downloads/wk

Reviews

Write one

Nobody has reviewed RLM Tools yet.

If you have run it, two minutes of your experience saves the next person an afternoon.

RLM Tools tools (3, 1 write)

write = sends, deletes, buys or posts

Read from the package source without running it. The installed server may list more.

  • rlm_end

    End an RLM exploration session and free resources.

  • rlm_executewrite action

    Execute Python in the session sandbox. detail_level controls response payload size (compact, usage, or full).

  • rlm_start

    Start an RLM exploration session. Returns session_id, metadata, limits, and available functions. Set include_guidance=true to include strategy/example coaching text.

Public scan report

scanner v0.1.10 · 2026-09-28 · same rubric, same numbers if you re-run it

no findings
  • Code scan18 source files scanned25/25
  • –Live reliabilityno gateway calls yet and no remote to proben/a
  • –Tool poisoningtools not inspected (local package is not executed); not countedn/a
  • Auth qualitylocal package, no credentials required12/15
  • Maintenancelast push 227 days ago4/15
  • Maintainer identityregistry namespace matches repository owner; GitHub account older than a year8/10
Overall 75/100. Components that don't apply are left out of the denominator. Any critical finding is an F.RubricAppeal a findingJSON

How RLM Tools compares

Against every graded MCP server, from our own scans and uptime checks. Updated after each scan run.

Safety score
75/100
higher than 45% of 48,255 servers
Tools
3
the typical server has 7
Tools that change things
33%
typical: 0%. Fewer write tools means less an agent can break
GitHub stars
8
more than 86% of 28,688 servers
Downloads a week
11
more than 3% of 12,191 servers with a package

What its tools let an agent do: 2 read · 1 change

Install RLM Tools in Claude Code, Cursor or VS Code

claude mcp add rlm-tools -- uvx rlm-tools
Add to Cursor

What the publisher says

From the RLM Tools repository's README, as published. We do not edit it. Read it on GitHub

RLM Tools

Your AI coding agent spends most of its token budget just reading your code — not reasoning about it. Every grep, file read, and glob result gets dumped into the conversation. On a large codebase, that's 25-35% of your context (and cost) burned on raw data the model never needed to see.

RLM Tools gives your agent a persistent sandbox to explore code in. Data stays server-side. Only the conclusions come back.

# Install in one line (Claude Code)
claude mcp add rlm-tools -- uvx rlm-tools

# Or Codex
codex mcp add rlm-tools -- uvx rlm-tools

That's it. Your agent automatically uses the sandbox for exploration. No config, no prompting changes.

What Changes

Without RLM Tools — agent greps for import UIKit, gets 500 matches dumped into context. Reads 10 files, burns all their content as tokens. Context window fills up. Agent forgets what it was doing.

With RLM Tools — agent runs the same exploration in a server-side Python sandbox. Data stays in sandbox memory. Only the print() output enters context:

matches = grep("import UIKit")
by_module = {}
for m in matches:
    module = m["file"].split("/")[0]
    by_module.setdefault(module, []).append(m)
for module, ms in sorted(by_module.items(), key=lambda x: -len(x[1]))[:5]:
    print(f"{module}: {len(ms)} files")

500 lines of grep results become 5 lines of summary. The agent sees what it needs, nothing more.

Real-World Impact

In typical coding workflows: 25-35% context reduction. That means your agent can explore roughly 40-50% more code before hitting context limits.

In heavy exploration tasks (reading many files, broad searches), savings go much further:

Full benchmark methodology and reproduction steps: docs/benchmarks.md

How It Works

Three MCP tools. That's the entire API:

The sandbox provides built-in helpers:

  • readfile(path) / readfiles(paths) — Read files into variables (cached across calls)
  • grep(pattern) / grepsummary(pattern) / grepread(pattern) — Search
  • glob_files(pattern) — Find files by pattern
  • tree(path, max_depth) — Directory structure
  • llm_query(prompt, context) — Sub-LLM analysis (optional, requires API key)

Variables persist across rlm_execute calls within a session. The agent can build up understanding incrementally — search, filter, read, analyze — without any intermediate data touching the context window.

Works With

RLM Tools is a standard MCP server. It works with any MCP-compatible client: Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, and others.

Other installation methods

JSON MCP config (Cursor, Windsurf, etc.)

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "rlm-tools": {
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": ["rlm-tools"]
    }
  }
}

Direct run

uvx rlm-tools

From source

git clone https://github.com/stefanoshea/rlm-tools.git
cd rlm-tools
uv sync
uv run rlm-tools

Then point your MCP client to command: uv, args: ["--directory", "/path/to/rlm-tools", "run", "rlm-tools"].

Configuration

Copy .env.example to .env to customize. All settings are optional — RLM Tools works out of the box with zero config.

Shortened. The full README is on GitHub.

Nothing above is checked by us. What we check is on the safety report.

RLM Tools: common questions

Is RLM Tools MCP server safe?
Mostly: it is graded B (75/100). Read the RLM Tools safety report
How do I install RLM Tools?
It runs on your machine. Copy the Claude Code, Cursor, VS Code or Claude Desktop config from the install section.
Does RLM Tools need an API key?
Not as far as the registry entry and our scan can tell: no credentials are declared or required.
Is RLM Tools maintained?
The last commit was 264 days ago (2026-02-13). The latest release is v0.1.0.
What can I use instead of RLM Tools?
Servers from other publishers that do the same job: Codebase Memory MCP server.
How does RLM Tools compare with other MCP servers?
safety score 75/100 (higher than 45% of 48,255 servers); tools 3 (the typical server has 7); tools that change things 33% (typical: 0%. Fewer write tools means less an agent can break). Full comparison.

Alternatives to RLM Tools

Same job from other publishers: the closest match first, then the best rated.

  • Codebase Memory
    Codebase knowledge graph for AI agents — 162 languages, sub-ms queries, 99% fewer tokens.
    C