Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to APVISO MCP Server

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables natural-language-driven security testing by orchestrating multiple pen-testing tools through MCP, with automated scan execution and AI-assisted vulnerability summarization.
      -
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      Not graded
      maintenance
      Enables AI-assisted penetration testing by connecting MCP clients to a Windows API server for executing penetration testing tools like nmap, ffuf, nuclei, and other security tools. Allows AI agents to perform automated security assessments, solve CTF challenges, and assist with ethical hacking tasks through natural language commands.
      10
      -
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Integrates 7 security tools (nmap, nuclei, dirsearch, sqlmap, hydra, Acunetix, Metasploit) via MCP protocol for AI-assisted penetration testing with enterprise-grade safety features.
      1
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Integrates OWASP ZAP security testing with AI assistants through MCP, enabling automated vulnerability scanning and AI-powered security analysis during development. Supports multiple scan types including active, passive, and AJAX spider scans with real-time status updates.
      5
      MIT
    • F
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables deep security auditing of web applications directly from AI IDEs including Cursor and Claude Code. Scans URLs for vulnerabilities, returns security scores with SHIP/BLOCK verdicts, and provides specific fix prompts for remediation.
      3
      -
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables MCP-compatible AI assistants to scan files and raw content for malware, prompt injection, and other threats, manage accounts and API keys, and access SDK/API documentation.
      -

    TDQS

    A3.9/5.0

    Scored across 18 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Every tool has a clearly distinct purpose with no ambiguity. Tools are organized around specific resources (scans, targets, schedules, findings, quota) and actions (create, get, list, update, delete, verify), making it easy for an agent to select the right one. For example, list_findings and get_report serve complementary but non-overlapping roles for accessing scan results.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern throughout, such as create_scan, get_report, list_targets, update_schedule, and delete_target. This predictability enhances readability and usability for agents, with no deviations or mixed conventions observed.

    Tool Count5/5

    With 18 tools, the server is well-scoped for its penetration testing domain, covering the full lifecycle from target registration and verification to scanning, reporting, and remediation tracking. Each tool earns its place by addressing a specific need without redundancy, making the count appropriate for the server's purpose.

    Completeness5/5

    The tool surface provides complete CRUD/lifecycle coverage for penetration testing. It includes target management (create, get, list, delete, verify), scan operations (create, get, list, schedule management), reporting (get_report, list_findings), quota checking, and finding status updates, with no obvious gaps that would hinder agent workflows.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessNo issues