Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
DanceNitra

inspeximus

by DanceNitra
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to inspeximus

Related Servers

  • dakera-mcp by Dakera-AI

    dakera-mcpofficial

    Dakera-AI
    A
    license
    A
    quality
    C
    maintenance
    Self-hosted MCP-native agent memory server. Gives AI agents persistent, decay-weighted memory via 83 MCP tools — no cloud, full control. RocksDB+HNSW backend. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and any MCP-compatible agent.
    14
    9
    MIT

  • verifiable-memory

    Mars-proj
    A
    license
    A
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    Memory for AI agents that can't hallucinate — answers only from stored facts with a citation, or honestly abstains. Provable forgetting (GDPR), valid-time, Merkle proofs, deterministic. MCP server, CPU-only, zero dependencies.
    13
    1
    MIT
  • Recall by RecallWorks

    Recallofficial

    RecallWorks
    A
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    C
    maintenance
    Open-source MCP memory server for AI agents — persistent, searchable, tiered memory across sessions. Works over stdio (Cursor, Claude Desktop) or HTTP+SSE. MIT licensed.
    8
    MIT

  • ForkMind

    Medhovarsh
    A
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    B
    maintenance
    Local-first MCP server that lets AI agents query their own LLM call history as a branchable DAG and offload conversation context into immutable, AES-256-GCM-encrypted capsules — restorable in full or per segment, crypto-shreddable, with RAID-style replication. 12 tools, no API keys, no cloud.
    104 npm
    3
    MIT

  • memfix

    saloni-garg
    A
    license
    B
    quality
    B
    maintenance
    Provenance-first agent memory MCP server with a real corrections API (assert/retract/supersede with tombstones) and a one-command junk audit for memory stores.
    5
    1
    MIT

  • Remnic

    joshuaswarren
    A
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    A
    maintenance
    Local-first memory for AI agents: one store shared by Claude Code, Codex CLI, Cursor, Pi, Hermes, OpenClaw, and any MCP client. Plain markdown with YAML frontmatter on your disk, hybrid BM25 + vector recall with per-result provenance (Recall X-ray), a correction contract, and the MemCorrect benchmark.
    231
    MIT
Deploy Server
Context All Your Agents Can ShareAgents share what they learn, hand off work, and hold it when you switch models. Start with 5 GB free.fulcradynamics.comAd

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Scored across 135 tools

Disambiguation3/5

Most tools are carefully differentiated and often explicitly cross-reference their siblings (get vs get_as, recall vs recall_as, forget vs forget_subject vs forget_pii, remember vs remember_decision). However, several clusters genuinely overlap: consolidate/sleep/consolidate_clusters all run consolidation, and compliance_report/compliance_check/governance_report/coverage/audit_bundle all report governance posture. With 135 tools, an agent faces real misselection risk across the compliance and maintenance clusters despite the verbose descriptions.

Naming Consistency4/5

Names are uniformly snake_case and follow a readable convention: verbs for actions (remember, forget, recall, credit, grant, revoke) and nouns or noun_report/noun_register pairs for views (contradictions, coverage, risk_register, incident_report). The pattern is mostly predictable, with only minor deviations from a strict verb_noun scheme.

Tool Count1/5

135 tools is an extreme surface for a single MCP server. Even granting the broad domain (memory store + GDPR + EU AI Act compliance + action ledger + partitions + ACL), the count far exceeds what an agent can hold coherently, and many tools could be consolidated into a handful of parameterized operations.

Completeness5/5

Coverage is exhaustive to the point of excess: full memory lifecycle (write, read, correct, revert, retire, erase), provenance, tamper-evidence, access control, partitions, and article-labelled EU AI Act/GDPR records with matching read-only registers for nearly every write. Obvious workflows have no dead ends.

Maintenance

ActivityActive
ResponsivenessSlow

Resources