Skip to main content
Glama
BerkantACUN

actions-guard-mcp

by BerkantACUN
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Related Servers

Alternatives to actions-guard-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • github-actions-audit

      UnbearableDev
      F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Audits GitHub Actions workflow files for supply-chain risks like script injection, leaked tokens, unpinned actions, and broad permissions.
      -

    • TaskBounty Check

      eliottreich
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Local-only GitHub Actions and CI maintenance scanner for AI-built apps. Exposes scan, explanation, and fix-planning tools to MCP clients; modifies nothing and makes no outbound requests by default.
      3
      35 npm
      2
      MIT

    • shipcheck-mcp

      noureldeensalama
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables MCP-compatible AI agents to scan code for leaked secrets, copyleft licenses, unprotected routes, missing privacy policies, and risky card handling before committing or shipping.
      163 npm
      MIT
    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

    A4/5.0

    Scored across 2 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    The two tools share the same core purpose (security scanning of GitHub Actions workflows) but are clearly differentiated by input source: one takes a file path and the other takes raw content. The descriptions explicitly clarify the difference, so an agent is unlikely to confuse them.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Both tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with a distinguishing suffix: 'scan_workflow_file' and 'scan_workflow_content'. This is clear, predictable, and allows easy selection based on input type.

    Tool Count3/5

    With only two tools, the server feels minimal for a security scanner. While the focus is narrow, the limited surface might be seen as thin, though it covers the primary use cases without being excessive.

    Completeness4/5

    The tool set covers the two main input modes for workflow scanning (file and raw content), which are the most common scenarios. However, it misses other potential inputs like URLs or repository paths, leaving a minor gap for an agent that wants to scan directly from a remote source.

    Maintenance

    ActivitySlowing
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources