Skip to main content
Glama
Cocongas

perimeter-mcp

by Cocongas
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to perimeter-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • phi-guard-mcp

      Abidit
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables local detection of protected health information in source code before it reaches LLM prompts, log statements, or analytics calls.
      2
      64 npm
      MIT

    • SnapBack MCP Server

      vreko-dev
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables AI-powered code safety analysis including risk detection, secret scanning, dependency checking, and code snapshot management. Works offline for basic features with optional cloud integration for advanced ML analysis and team collaboration.
      5 npm
      1
      Apache 2.0

    • readyorai

      TedoNeObichaJavaScript
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables local code inspection and analysis for clean code practices, best practices, and actionable recommendations without external API calls or modifying the code.
      39 npm
      1
      MIT

    • Medical MCP Server

      AntonioMartin947
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables AI assistants to query authoritative sources such as the FDA, WHO, PubMed, RxNorm, and ClinicalTrials.gov for drug information, health statistics, clinical guidelines, and literature with evidence grading. It runs locally with no API keys required, adding rate limiting, circuit breakers, caching, and health monitoring for reliable private access.
      82 npm
      ISC
    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

    A4.1/5.0

    Scored across 1 tool

    Disambiguation5/5

    With only one tool in the set, there is no possibility of tool-to-tool confusion. The single tool has a clearly stated, narrow purpose (scanning code for health-data privacy mistakes), so selection is unambiguous.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    The lone name, perimeter_scan_code, follows a clean snake_case verb_noun-ish convention and is internally consistent with the server's 'perimeter' branding. No mixed conventions exist to conflict with it.

    Tool Count3/5

    One tool is thin for a server surface, though the tool itself is substantive rather than trivial and the domain (a fixed-rule static scanner) is narrow enough that a single entry point is defensible. It sits on the borderline between well-scoped and under-provisioned.

    Completeness3/5

    The core operation—scan and report findings—is covered, but a scanning domain typically also wants rule enumeration, rule suppression/configuration, and directory- or repo-level scanning rather than a single invocation. These are notable gaps an agent cannot work around with the current surface.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources