Skip to main content
Glama
ZeroPathAI

ZeroPath MCP Server

Official
by ZeroPathAI

Related Servers

Alternatives to ZeroPath MCP Server

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      The Checkmarx Security MCP server bridges your AI assistant (Claude, Cursor, Copilot, etc.) with Checkmarx One's enterprise application security platform. It exposes security workflows as natural-language-accessible MCP tools, allowing developers to scan code, investigate findings, and receive context-aware fixes without leaving their development environment.
      Apache 2.0
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables AI coding assistants to leverage Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) capabilities, allowing developers to write secure code, query security risks, trigger diff scans, and manage security findings directly from their AI assistant.
      4
      Apache 2.0
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables AI coding tools to scan projects for security vulnerabilities, hardcoded secrets, injection flaws, and privacy violations with 699 rules and 76 MCP tools, all running locally with zero telemetry.
      12 npm
      7
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Provides AI coding assistants with real-time security scanning superpowers, including SAST, secrets detection, dependency CVE scanning, and web vulnerability assessment.
      10 npm
      Apache 2.0

    TDQS

    B3.4/5.0

    Scored across 17 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Most tools have distinct purposes, but some overlap exists: 'get_issues_by_vuln_class' and 'search_vulnerabilities' both involve vulnerability discovery, though the former focuses on statistics and the latter on search. 'list_sca_vulnerabilities' and 'search_vulnerabilities' could be confused as both handle vulnerability queries, but their scopes differ (SCA vs. general). Overall, descriptions help clarify boundaries, but minor ambiguity remains.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tools follow a consistent verb_noun naming pattern (e.g., 'approve_patch', 'archive_issue', 'generate_patch'). There are no deviations in style or convention, making the set predictable and easy to parse. This uniformity enhances usability and reduces cognitive load for agents.

    Tool Count4/5

    With 17 tools, the count is slightly high but reasonable for a security vulnerability management domain, covering issues, patches, scans, repositories, and SCA. It feels comprehensive without being overwhelming, though it borders on the upper limit of typical scoping (3-15 tools).

    Completeness5/5

    The toolset provides complete coverage for security vulnerability management: CRUD operations for issues (get, archive/unarchive, mark status), patch lifecycle (generate, approve), scanning (start, list), repository management, and SCA vulnerabilities. No obvious gaps exist; agents can handle full workflows from detection to resolution.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessNo issues