Skip to main content
Glama
Atlasent

atlasent-mcp

Official

Related Servers

Alternatives to atlasent-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables LLM agents to safely invoke enterprise MCP tools under an enforceable guard that applies allowlist policies, caller roles, parameter restrictions, human confirmation for destructive operations, and a correlated JSONL audit log.
      AGPL 3.0
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Stateless enterprise policy firewall & token-cost proxy for MCP. It enforces identity, policy, and budget on every tool call.
      1
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Governs AI agent tool calls by checking them against Agentic Control Plane policies, returning allow/deny/ask decisions with audit logging and identity attribution for MCP clients like Claude and ChatGPT. Exposes acp_check and acp_status tools for policy enforcement and connection verification.
      MIT
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Provides a secure MCP boundary for AI agents, intercepting and validating tool calls, redacting secrets, and requiring human approval for sensitive actions with a tamper-evident audit trail.
      -
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables MCP-speaking agents to execute tool calls through an authorization gate, producing signed decision records and reconciled effect rows for accountability.
      6
      Apache 2.0

    TDQS

    B3.3/5.0

    Scored across 45 tools

    Disambiguation2/5

    The set contains near-duplicate entry points (evaluate/atlasent_evaluate, verify_permit/atlasent_verify_permit) that are hard to distinguish, and several permit-related tools (get/check/verify/permit) overlap in semantics. Many other tools are distinct, but the duplicates create real misselection risk.

    Naming Consistency3/5

    Most tools follow an atlasent_<verb>_<noun> pattern, but the pattern is broken by unprefixed evaluate, verify_permit, and deploy_service, plus generic names like atlasent_query and atlasent_permit. Still readable and mostly snake_case, so not chaotic.

    Tool Count2/5

    45 tools is far above the well-scoped range, and several are redundant (duplicate evaluate/verify) or a demo (deploy_service). A leaner set could cover the same platform with fewer entry points.

    Completeness3/5

    Core policy/permit/decision workflows are well covered, but subdomains have gaps: SCIM groups are read-only, webhooks have create/delete but no list/get, and SIEM config has no delete. These are workable but notable omissions for an admin surface.

    Maintenance

    ActivityActive
    ResponsivenessUnresponsive