Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to CONTINUUM

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Tamper-evident audit logging for AI agents. Append-only, hash-chained, optionally Ed25519-signed log. The MCP server lets an agent keep and verify a record of what it actually did.
      8
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Local-first MCP server that lets AI agents query their own LLM call history as a branchable DAG and offload conversation context into immutable, AES-256-GCM-encrypted capsules — restorable in full or per segment, crypto-shreddable, with RAID-style replication. 12 tools, no API keys, no cloud.
      78 npm
      3
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      AI-agent observability server whose distinguishing feature is a SHA-256 hash-chained, tamper-evident audit log with chain verification and signed export. Works with Claude Desktop, Cursor, and any MCP client.
      22
      2 npm
      25
      MIT
    • F
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      An MCP server that exposes governance, trust-scoring, compliance, guardrail, cost, drift, and supply-chain scanning tools and resources to any MCP client over stdio, Streamable HTTP, or legacy HTTP+SSE. It lets agents route every tool call through a deterministic five-way decision (allow, redact, require approval, deny, or quarantine) with hash-chained evidence, human approval workflows, and in-agent trust gates for LangChain, LangGraph, and Google ADK.
      30
      -
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Universal governance layer for AI agents — MCP-native, fail-closed, LNN interpretability. Governed receipts, IPFS audit proofs, and rollback for any agent in any framework.
      3
      78 npm
      Apache 2.0

    TDQS

    A4.1/5.0

    Scored across 13 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    The side-effect tools have clearly separated roles, as do resume, validate, and confirm. The main ambiguity is among record_progress, record_plan, record_summary, and checkpoint: their purposes differ, but their recommended calling points can coincide, leaving uncertainty about whether multiple calls are expected.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Every tool uses the same continuum_ prefix and snake_case convention. Names are verb-led or naturally verbal, with consistent action-oriented terminology across the side-effect lifecycle.

    Tool Count5/5

    Thirteen tools is well suited to the combined scope of durable run recovery and safe external side effects. Each tool supports a distinct lifecycle step without obvious redundancy or unnecessary expansion.

    Completeness5/5

    The surface covers run state capture, planning, checkpointing, validation, confirmation, and resumption. It also provides a closed side-effect lifecycle from interception through completion or failure, reconciliation of uncertain outcomes, compensation, and inspection.

    Maintenance

    ActivityActive
    ResponsivenessSyncing