Skip to main content
Glama
bindlerhq

Bindler MCP

Official
by bindlerhq
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Hybrid

Related Servers

Alternatives to Bindler MCP

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • Nexus Finance

      djtellado
      A
      license
      B
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      AI workbench for financial contract analysis, risk analytics (VaR/CVaR, RWA Basel III), regulatory compliance (EMIR, REMIT, MiFID II, CBAM, EUDR) and counterparty due diligence (KYB/UBO, OFAC, IMO). Zero Retention. 8 MCP tools.
      8
      15 npm
      MIT

    • lexrag

      SECINTS
      F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables retrieval-augmented question answering over EU AI Act and NIS-2 legal texts via MCP tools, with hybrid search and verified article-level citations.
      -

    • ActTrace

      goww7
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      MCP server for EU AI Act compliance, providing risk classification of AI features and Article 50 transparency notices.
      2
      26 PyPI
      1
      Apache 2.0
    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

    A4.2/5.0

    Scored across 4 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool maps to a distinct regulation and jurisdiction (UAE corporate tax, EU AI Act, CBAM, CSRD), so there is no realistic overlap or risk of misselection. Descriptions even state explicitly when to prefer each tool over estimation.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    All names are snake_case and prefixed by the regulation/subject area (uae_, eu_ai_act_, cbam_, csrd_), which is predictable. The trailing token varies in kind—noun (tax, cost, scope) versus verb (classify)—a minor inconsistency rather than a real problem.

    Tool Count5/5

    Four tools is well within the sensible 3-15 range, and each one is a substantial, self-contained statutory computation with no filler tools. The surface is tightly scoped to a regulatory-calculation purpose.

    Completeness4/5

    Each tool covers its full computation lifecycle (inputs, verdict, article-level breakdown, dates, fines), so no single regulation is a dead end. Minor gaps remain: no cross-regulation discovery tool (e.g. 'which of these apply to my company') and no scenario comparison or output-format options outside CBAM's built-in year sweep.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources