Skip to main content
Glama
LuciferForge

agent-safety-mcp

by LuciferForge

Related Servers

Alternatives to agent-safety-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      MCP server for AI agent security guardrails. Provides input validation, prompt injection detection, PII redaction, output filtering, policy enforcement, rate limiting, and comprehensive audit logging.
      31 npm
      1
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      A drop-in proxy that guards MCP servers with policy enforcement, secret redaction, prompt-injection screening, rug-pull detection, rate limiting, and audit logging.
      5 npm
      Apache 2.0
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables deterministic detection and neutralization of adversarial prompt injections and override attempts in AI agent workflows via a zero-dependency MCP server, providing structured telemetry and low-latency validation.
      8
      -
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      A deterministic MCP server that guards AI/agent output by detecting secrets, injection, and PII in ~85µs with zero dependencies. Gives a clear ship/block verdict and runs locally or hosted.
      2
      Apache 2.0
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      MCP server that detects and guards against tool poisoning and prompt injection attacks in tool descriptions and schemas. It provides risk scoring, pattern detection, safe rewriting, and audit reports with zero external API cost.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      C
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Security scanner and MCP server that catches dangerous patterns in MCP servers and AI agent projects, such as leaked secrets, shell execution, and prompt-injection text. Runs as both a CLI and MCP server with CI-friendly severity gates.
      2
      1
      MIT

    TDQS

    A3.9/5.0

    Scored across 17 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Most tools have distinct purposes with clear boundaries between cost management, injection detection, KYA identity, and tracing domains. However, injection_check and injection_scan have overlapping functionality (both scan text for injections), which could cause confusion despite different blocking behaviors. The other tools are well-differentiated within their respective domains.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Tool names follow highly consistent snake_case patterns with clear domain prefixes: cost_guard_*, injection_*, kya_*, trace_*, and safety_check. Each tool name clearly indicates its domain and function, with no mixing of conventions or inconsistent verb styles across the set.

    Tool Count4/5

    17 tools is slightly high but reasonable for covering multiple safety domains (cost, injection, identity, tracing). The count feels comprehensive rather than excessive, though some consolidation might improve coherence. Each domain has an appropriate number of tools for its scope.

    Completeness5/5

    The tool set provides complete coverage for agent safety workflows: cost management (configure, check, record, status), injection detection (check, scan, patterns), KYA identity (create, sign, verify, key generation), and tracing (start, step, summary, save). The safety_check tool even provides unified coverage, and there are no obvious gaps in the safety lifecycle.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessUnresponsive