shpbl-scan-coverage-autopilot
Related Servers
Alternatives to shpbl-scan-coverage-autopilot
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables authorized penetration testing and security assessments with CVE monitoring, vulnerability scanning, and reporting features.MIT
- AlicenseBqualityCmaintenanceEnables evolving scan and policy configurations by inferring security phenotypes from observed findings, seeding competing genomes, measuring fitness, and generating bounded trial plans with ancestry lineage.5MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceOffers proof-only tools to inspect and verify remediation closure receipts, deterministically confirming asset coverage, fixed artifact deployment, rescanning, deadline compliance, and zero-residual closure without executing scans or touching live systems.MIT
- AlicenseBqualityCmaintenanceEnables deterministic what-if analysis of exposure remediation by simulating bounded interventions against a sealed baseline graph, then ranking scenarios by weighted risk, reachable attack surface, and cost while marking Pareto-efficient options.3MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceProvides AI agents with standardized security scanning capabilities for authorized assessments, including host detection, port scanning, service fingerprinting, web vulnerability scanning, CVE verification, and report generation, all with unified JSON output and strict compliance controls.-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables users to trace regulatory rule changes to affected parties and required actions through deterministic safety gates, returning dated action plans and hash-linked evidence records. Supports 12 MCP tools over stdio or streamable HTTP for source comparison, obligation decomposition, scope assessment, planning, and evidence validation across multiple domain packs.MIT
TDQS
Scored across 3 tools
Each tool maps to a distinct stage of the scan-coverage workflow: analyzing blind spots, generating a plan, and comparing sealed plans. There is no meaningful overlap that would cause an agent to pick the wrong tool.
All tools share a clear scan_ prefix and use snake_case action-oriented names. scan_plan is slightly less explicit than the verb_noun pattern of the others, but the convention is still easy to predict.
Three tools is at the lower end of the ideal range but is well-scoped for the server's narrow autopilot purpose. Each tool earns its place and no tool feels redundant.
The set covers the core cycle of analyzing, generating, and comparing scan plans. There are minor gaps, such as no explicit plan listing or management operation, but the primary workflow is supported without dead ends.