Skip to main content
Glama
Cubiczan

@cubiczan/chp-mcp

by Cubiczan
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Related Servers

Alternatives to @cubiczan/chp-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • vantic-mcp by vanticlabs

      vantic-mcpofficial

      vanticlabs
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables MCP hosts to verify agent spending mandates and receipts, providing stateless tools for authorization, chain verification, credential verification, and DID resolution.
      Apache 2.0

    • @cubiczan/chp-mcp

      Cubiczan
      A
      license
      B
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enforces consensus-hardened tool approval with HMAC-signed receipts, policy gates, and host-bound argument checks for MCP clients.
      12
      32 npm
      MIT

    • rails-mcp

      jaimenbell
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Default-deny action registry, append-only spend ledger, and human sign-off audit trail (MCP tools).
      6
      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

    B3.4/5.0

    Scored across 12 tools

    Disambiguation3/5

    Most tools occupy distinct lifecycle stages, but the authorization/receipt cluster—request_authorization, approve_spend, issue_approval_receipt, authorize_tool_call—has enough overlap that an agent could choose the wrong entry point without careful reading. The two evaluate_* tools also require close attention to distinguish spend-gate evaluation from general tool-approval evaluation.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    The set is predominantly snake_case verb_noun with a recognizable vocabulary: evaluate_spend_gate, issue_approval_receipt, place_equity_order, and inspect_audit_ledger all follow the pattern. Minor deviations are the noun-style chp_content_hash and chp_version utilities, plus the slightly awkward wire_treasury_transfer.

    Tool Count4/5

    Twelve tools is within the ideal range and each supports a distinct part of the CHP flow: evaluate, request/approve/issue, authorize, execute, and audit. It is slightly heavy relative to only three reference action tools, but not bloated for a protocol-focused server.

    Completeness4/5

    The evaluate-to-approve/deny-to-receipt-to-authorize-to-execute-to-audit lifecycle is well covered, including denial logging and replay/expiry checks. Minor gaps include no receipt revocation or pending-approval listing, but these do not break the stated CHP Profile B scope.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources