Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to keygrant

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Lets AI coding agents read project documentation and secret metadata, then use credentials by injecting them into child processes while redacting the values from all output. Agents can deploy, migrate databases, or SSH using real secrets without the values ever entering their context, transcripts, or logs.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables AI coding agents to securely inject API keys and secrets into environment files, configs, or commands without the agent ever seeing the secret values.
      4 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to securely use real secrets (API keys, database passwords) by requiring human approval for each release, ensuring secrets never enter the model's context.
      2
      Apache 2.0
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Local MCP server for entering API keys outside chat. Deliver secrets to commands or .env files using an inline MCP App or a paired localhost browser.
      6
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Local security layer for coding agents: keeps secret values out of what Claude Code, Codex CLI, Cursor and OpenCode send to their model, and checks untrusted text for prompt injection. MIT, runs on your machine, no account.
      4
      4
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to list entries and metadata, run commands with secrets injected as environment variables while scrubbing every value from the output, copy secrets straight to the clipboard, and generate or store new secrets without their plaintext ever entering the conversation. Obvious dumpers are refused and destructive edits require explicit confirmation, closing off accidental exposure paths.
      MIT

    TDQS

    A4.7/5.0

    Scored across 2 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    The two tools are cleanly split between discovery (list_secrets) and use (exec_with_secrets), with no overlap in purpose. The description of list_secrets explicitly redirects execution to exec_with_secrets, making the boundary unambiguous.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Both names follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern (list_secrets, exec_with_secrets). The shared '_secrets' suffix reinforces the pairing and makes the relationship between the tools obvious.

    Tool Count4/5

    Two tools is a deliberately minimal surface, but for a narrow secret-brokering server each tool earns its place and there is no redundancy. It is slightly thin compared to a typical 3-15 tool set, but the tight scope justifies it.

    Completeness4/5

    The list-then-execute lifecycle for consuming secrets is fully covered, including approval and redaction semantics. There is no way to create, rotate, or inspect secret metadata (only names/descriptions), implying vault management lives outside this server — a minor gap an agent can work around.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessSyncing