Skip to main content
Glama
Asaad-Suliman

hardened-terminal-mcp

Related Servers

Alternatives to hardened-terminal-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      A sandboxed MCP server that executes shell commands inside ephemeral, locked-down Docker containers with no network by default, dropped capabilities, and an audit log, enabling secure agent-driven command execution.
      3 npm
      MIT
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      A safety-first MCP server enabling file inspection/editing, allowlisted command execution, process listing, and optional desktop automation. It emphasizes security with disabled writes/commands/GUI by default and local feature gates.
      1
      -
    • A
      license
      B
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      A secure MCP server for executing whitelisted shell commands with resource and timeout controls, designed for integration with Claude and other MCP-compatible LLMs.
      20
      389 npm
      7
      MIT
    • A
      license
      B
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      A secure MCP server for Windows Subsystem for Linux environments, facilitating safe command execution with extensive validation and protection against vulnerabilities like shell injection and dangerous commands.
      7
      67 npm
      23
      MIT

    TDQS

    A4.3/5.0

    Scored across 2 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: one executes commands after policy evaluation, the other only simulates to show the policy verdict. Their descriptions explicitly highlight the difference, making it impossible to confuse them.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Both tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with snake_case (run_command, explain_command), which is clear and predictable.

    Tool Count3/5

    With only 2 tools, the surface is very small. While it might suffice for a minimal sandboxed terminal, the server's name suggests broader functionality, so the count feels slightly lacking but not severely mismatched.

    Completeness2/5

    The tools cover execution and policy checking, but there is no ability to manage policies (e.g., view, edit, list) or handle command history. This leaves notable gaps that agents would need to work around.

    Maintenance

    ActivitySlowing
    ResponsivenessNo issues