Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to Cyan Eclipse Cluster MCP

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables offline, deterministic verification that one immutable artifact followed a declared build-to-production promotion chain, using only hash-based evidence and failing closed on incomplete or nonconformant gate records.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Audits infrastructure configurations (Dockerfiles, GitHub Actions, Kubernetes, Terraform/Compose) against 14 deterministic security rules, returning BLOCK/REVIEW/PASS verdicts and signing attestations. Helps agents verify deployment configs before applying them.
      1
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Self-hosted MCP gateway that applies deterministic, compiled policy to tool discovery, invocation, and outbound data flow, with no model in the enforcement path. Every decision emits a hash-chained receipt sealed with Ed25519 and verifiable using public keys only.
      Apache 2.0
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      A safety gate for agent-proposed NixOS configuration changes, grading security-relevant option deltas, attesting closures for vulnerabilities, and requiring human approval with a tamper-evident audit ledger.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables security remediation as one auditable transaction: freezing pre-change exposure, computing blast radius, gating on policy and approval, binding execution receipts, verifying post-state, and rolling back on failure, all sealed in a SHA-256 evidence chain.
      6
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Gates every AI agent tool call against your policy before it runs, then writes a hash-chained, tamper-evident record of what was decided and what happened. Anyone can verify that record offline, without your software, your systems or any key you hold.
      4
      1,134 PyPI
      15
      AGPL 3.0

    TDQS

    B3.4/5.0

    Scored across 3 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool targets a distinct object and action: verifying an image, inspecting loaded policies, and listing the receipt ledger. There is no plausible way to confuse them, and the descriptions reinforce the boundaries (action vs. configuration vs. audit trail).

    Naming Consistency4/5

    All three names are snake_case and readable, but the ordering convention is mixed: verify_image is verb_noun while policy_show and receipt_list are noun_verb. It is consistent enough to predict, but not a single uniform pattern.

    Tool Count4/5

    Three tools is on the lean side but fits the narrow scope of a verification gate: verify, inspect policy, read ledger. Each tool clearly earns its place with no filler.

    Completeness4/5

    The core lifecycle — gate on verify, inspect the policy being enforced, audit past verdicts — is fully covered with a fail-closed design. Minor gaps exist, such as fetching a single receipt by ID or a policy reload/validation operation, but agents can work around them via receipt_list and policy_show.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues