Skip to main content
Glama
AgentTanuki

Agent Guild

by AgentTanuki
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Related Servers

Alternatives to Agent Guild

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • TrustMesh MCP Server

      Clioloop
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      Not graded
      maintenance
      Provides AI agents with trust scoring and reputation management capabilities for secure interactions. Enables agents to check trust scores, rate interactions, and manage disputes before transacting with other agents.
      -

    • moltbridge

      SageMindAI
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Agent network intelligence for trust verification, broker discovery, and capability matching. Ed25519 identity, graph-based trust scoring, USDC payments, and MCP tools for agent registration, search, and trust attestation.
      284 npm
      5
      MIT

    • mint-protocol

      FoundryNet
      F
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Universal work attestation for autonomous agents. Register any AI agent or machine with persistent cryptographic identity, attest completed work with tamper-evident on-chain records, and query trust scores. The reputation layer for the agent economy. 3 MCP tools over SSE. Settled on Solana.
      11
      2
      -
    Deploy Server
    One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

    TDQS

    B3.1/5.0

    Scored across 43 tools

    Disambiguation3/5

    The tool set spans several domains (trust index, escrow, passports, JSON utilities, table utilities, text utilities, data utilities, calc utilities, code utilities). Within each domain tools are distinct, but there is overlap in purpose: e.g. guild_best_agent, guild_check, and guild_search all help choose an agent; guild_preflight, guild_preflight_deep, and guild_evidence_bundle all verify endpoint safety with overlapping features. This causes some ambiguity.

    Naming Consistency3/5

    There are two naming conventions: guild_* for the core trust/escrow tools, and ag_* for utility capabilities. Within each group naming is mostly consistent (verb_noun or domain_action). However, the mix of prefixes and some vague verbs like guild_check, guild_watch, guild_report, and the fact that ag_table_csv_to_json and ag_table_json_to_csv are a clear pair but guild_evidence_bundle vs guild_evidence_verify are less predictable, reduces consistency.

    Tool Count2/5

    With 43 tools, this is a large surface. The core trust/escrow functionality (guild_*) is about 20 tools, and the utility capabilities (ag_*) add another 23. While each utility is small, the total feels heavy and would benefit from grouping or trimming. It is above the ideal range and risks overwhelming agents.

    Completeness3/5

    The core trust workflows are well covered: register, prove, attest, record, escrow open/release, search, preflight, evidence. However, there are some gaps: no tool to cancel an escrow, no tool to list your own watches beyond the feed, no tool to revoke an attestation, and no direct way to list all agents except via search. The utility set is broad but not exhaustive (e.g., no base64 encode/decode, no hash other than sha256). Overall, notable but not fatal gaps.

    Maintenance

    ActivityActive
    ResponsivenessSlow

    Resources