Skip to main content
Glama
Vectorindia1

PyRIT MCP Server

by Vectorindia1
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Related Servers

Alternatives to PyRIT MCP Server

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • Maester MCP Server

      iffystrayer
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Exposes the Maester security test framework for Microsoft 365/Entra/Defender as MCP tools, enabling AI agents to run tests, audit AI agents and MCP servers, and investigate security posture.
      9
      MIT

    • secagent

      RicardoMLu777
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables LLM-driven security assessments by exposing Kali tools like nmap, httpx, sqlmap, and ffuf as MCP tools, with explicit planning, parallel tool calls, tiered memory, MITRE ATT&CK mapping, and human approval gates for intrusive operations.
      2
      MIT

    • msf-harness

      Suzu-Testing
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to conduct authorized penetration tests by providing scope-enforced access to Metasploit Framework's RPC, with tools for reconnaissance, exploitation, session management, and post-exploitation.
      3
      MIT

    • Mergen

      g4sk0
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      AI-Powered Red Team MCP Server enabling autonomous penetration testing via Model Context Protocol with 44+ security tools for AI agents.
      15
      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

    A3.6/5.0

    Scored across 22 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool targets a distinct action (create, configure, run, cancel, etc.) on a specific resource (engagement, target, attack, finding, report). The list tools clearly differentiate by what they list, and get vs list tools are distinct. No two tools have ambiguous boundaries.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tool names use consistent verb_noun snake_case (e.g., create_engagement, run_attack, list_findings). The verbs are varied but follow a predictable pattern, and there is no mixing of naming conventions or vague verbs.

    Tool Count5/5

    22 tools is well-scoped for an AI red-team engagement server, covering engagement management, target configuration, attack execution, scoring, reporting, and status queries. Each tool earns its place without feeling excessive or insufficient.

    Completeness5/5

    The tool set provides full lifecycle coverage: create/close engagements, configure/validate targets, run/continue/cancel attacks, score responses, add findings, generate/export/list reports, and list capabilities. No obvious gaps exist that would hinder an agent from completing typical red-team workflows.

    Maintenance

    ActivityStale
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources