Skip to main content
Glama
HarperZ9

Project Telos

by HarperZ9
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to Project Telos

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • telos-mcp by TELOS-Labs-AI

      telos-mcpofficial

      TELOS-Labs-AI
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Exposes TELOS governance primitives—action scoring, receipt verification, Purpose Anchor inspection, audit-chain queries, and CCRS counterfactual replay—as MCP tools, resources, and prompts for any MCP-compatible client.
      5
      Apache 2.0

    • Living Stack MCP — Retired

      equinoxaifinance-rgb
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Retired snapshot of the former 15-tool Apache-2.0 beta. Use Living Stack Community for the free seven-tool proof edition; Complete Local is the paid runtime with memory, recovery, signed traces, release verification, and multi-agent workflows.
      14
      Apache 2.0

    • Ecological Provisioning MCP

      Eco-Wealth
      F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      A local-first MCP server stub that exposes provisioning tools for converting ecological intent into work packets, proof plans, receipts, and validation workflows.
      -

    • fallimmig-us-mcp

      sjgant80-hub
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      A sovereign, MIT-licensed MCP server for professional-service workflows, providing offline-capable, Ed25519-signed tools for autonomous agents and human developers.
      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

    A3.8/5.0

    Scored across 41 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Most tools have distinct, domain-specific purposes (e.g., ci.doctor vs presentation.doctor, various proof types). However, a few could be confused (catalog vs status vs server.manifest, context.envelope vs context.pack), and the large number increases selection difficulty.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tools follow a consistent hierarchical dot-separated namespace with lowercase snake_case (e.g., telos.catalog, telos.ci.doctor, telos.proof.visual). The pattern is predictable across all 41 tools.

    Tool Count2/5

    With 41 tools, the surface is well above the typical 3-15 range and exceeds the 25+ threshold for 'too many.' This large number imposes significant cognitive load and likely includes tools that could be consolidated.

    Completeness4/5

    The set covers a wide range of read-only diagnostic and contract areas (CI, presentation, accessibility, proofs, research, etc.), but lacks any mutation or action tools. For a read-only operator spine, coverage is strong, though some gaps may exist.

    Maintenance

    ActivityActive
    ResponsivenessWithin a week

    Resources