Proof Publisher MCP
Related Servers
Alternatives to Proof Publisher MCP
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseBqualityBmaintenanceAn MCP server that enforces fail-closed deterministic checks, independent refute-first review, and tamper-evident hash-chained receipts for AI agent outputs before claiming completion.43MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceAn MCP server for agent authorization that tests the full effect surface and enforces control over consequential actions before dispatch, emitting verifiable execution evidence.2Apache 2.0
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceAn MCP server that enables deterministic observation of public web pages and commercial interpretation of changes, with credential-gated access and honest accounting.1 npm-
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceA governed MCP server exposing 37 risk-checked tools with signed Ed25519 receipts on a Bitcoin-anchored ledger, failing closed if governance or receipt writing fails.-
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceAn MCP server that acts as an authorization gateway between an AI agent and external systems, deterministically refusing actions that exceed granted authority and sealing every decision into an auditable chain of custody.-
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceMCP server for creating cryptographically signed and timestamped evidence of public web/API responses, with offline verification of attestations and paid access via x402.-
TDQS
Scored across 1 tool
With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusing it with another. The tool's purpose is clearly defined as publishing a proof summary to a webhook.
The single tool name 'publish_proof' follows a clean verb_noun pattern, and with only one tool, there are no inconsistencies or mixed conventions.
Having only one tool feels thin for an MCP server, and it falls below the typical 3-15 range. While the server's scope is narrow, the meager count makes the set seem insufficient for broader tasks.
The core action of publishing a proof is present and functional, but the server lacks supporting operations like querying published proofs or managing webhook allowlists. This leaves minor gaps that an agent might need to work around.