iTechSmart MCP Server
OfficialRelated Servers
Alternatives to iTechSmart MCP Server
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseBqualityBmaintenanceConnects AI agents to the UAIO platform for autonomous IT operations and ProofLink cryptographic verification, enabling tasks like querying platform status, verifying receipts, and simulating attacks.6646 npmMIT
- FlicenseCqualityBmaintenanceEnables AI assistants to autonomously perform site reliability engineering including monitoring, root-cause analysis, impact assessment, and remediation with cryptographic zero-trust enforcement.20-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables LLMs and AI agents to perform defensive security posture assessments, privilege escalation surface audits, and post-quantum cryptography readiness checks through read-only diagnostic tools.MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceEnables AI agents to query cryptographically verified facts with zero-knowledge proofs, selective disclosure, and tamper-evident provenance.336 npm1Apache 2.0
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceEnables AI agents to create cryptographically verifiable receipts of their delegated work, with capabilities for multi-party approval and offline verification.1150 npmApache 2.0
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceEnables AI agents to sign decisions with post-quantum cryptographic proofs and maintain secure audit trails for compliance. It provides tools for stamping events, verifying chain integrity, and exporting audit data across industries like finance and healthcare.430 npmMIT
TDQS
Scored across 66 tools
Many tools overlap in purpose, e.g., multiple incident listing tools (list_recent_incidents, mission.list_incidents, itsm_list_open_incidents) and numerous health check tools (langfuse_health, mesh_health, probo_health, etc.). Aliases like compliance.audit_summary for get_compliance_status add confusion.
Tools use both snake_case (get_compliance_status) and dot notation (mission.list_incidents, prooflink.verify_receipt). Different prefixes (itsm_, ghl_, trmm_) are consistent within their subgroup but overall pattern is mixed.
66 tools is excessive for a single server. The server attempts to cover multiple unrelated domains (ITSM, GHL, Deepgram, compliance, integrations), lacking a focused scope. Many tools are redundant or too granular.
The tool set covers many read operations but lacks write operations for several domains (e.g., no update_ticket in ITSM). There are many health checks but limited action tools. The domain is poorly defined, making it hard to assess completeness.