Skip to main content
Glama
GILSMON

MCP Policy Gatekeeper

by GILSMON
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to MCP Policy Gatekeeper

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • corbat by corbat-tech

      corbatofficial

      corbat-tech
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Policy and quality engine for AI coding agents that enforces team coding standards and provides validation gates for agent-assisted software delivery.
      7
      32 npm
      4
      MIT

    • sentrik

      maxgerhardson
      F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Provides AI coding agents with real-time access to compliance rules, scan results, and remediation guidance to enforce coding standards and security policies on generated code.
      -

    • Laguarde

      FuturPanda
      F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI coding agents to evaluate actions against team-defined policies, record decisions, and obtain human approvals for potentially risky operations.
      58 npm
      1
      -

    • hejdar-mcp

      ARKALDA
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Runtime policy enforcement for AI agents. Evaluate every agent action against your organization's policies before execution, with observe and enforce modes.
      1
      1
      MIT
    • Rigour MCP by rigour-labs

      Rigour MCPofficial

      rigour-labs
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to self-govern by scanning code for hardcoded secrets, structural violations, and AI drift in real-time, providing fix packets for automatic remediation.
      27
      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

    A3.5/5.0

    Scored across 5 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose targeting specific file operations: create, delete, list, read, and write. There is no overlap or ambiguity between these functions, making tool selection straightforward for an agent.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (e.g., create_file, delete_file) using snake_case throughout. The naming is predictable and aligns perfectly with the operations performed.

    Tool Count5/5

    With 5 tools, the server is well-scoped for file management, covering essential CRUD operations (create, read, update via write, delete) and listing. Each tool earns its place without being excessive or insufficient.

    Completeness5/5

    The tool set provides complete coverage for basic file operations in the domain, including create, read, update (write), delete, and list. There are no obvious gaps, and agents can perform full file lifecycle management without dead ends.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources