Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to polaris-audit

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Performs comprehensive website health audits including SSL, DNS, email authentication, performance, uptime, and broken link checks, all without requiring API keys. Returns a scored report with weighted metrics and actionable recommendations.
      7
      68 npm
      MIT
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Passive website security and trust auditor that checks for security, SEO, AI surface, email, and other exposures, producing a score and remediation plan.
      -
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Audits any site's UX the way a design-literate reviewer would — contrast, tap targets, type scale, colour discipline, scan patterns, copy — and returns the rule, the source line and the exact fix.
      6
      Apache 2.0
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      Not graded
      maintenance
      Provides comprehensive website auditing for SEO, performance, accessibility, and security using AI-powered analysis. It enables users to generate detailed audit reports and actionable improvement suggestions for any given URL.
      -
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables auditing any public website, returning a scored plain-English report that flags issues costing customers, covering speed, phone experience, search visibility, contact options, writing quality, and modernity.
      1
      MIT

    TDQS

    A4.2/5.0

    Scored across 3 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: audit_url initiates a scan, get_scan_result retrieves results for a submitted scan, and get_public_result fetches publicly shared reports by UUID. There is no overlap in functionality, making tool selection unambiguous for an agent.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (audit_url, get_public_result, get_scan_result) using snake_case. The naming is predictable and readable, with no deviations in style or convention.

    Tool Count3/5

    With only 3 tools, the server feels thin for an audit domain that might benefit from additional operations like listing scans, deleting results, or updating reports. However, the core workflow (submit, retrieve, fetch public) is covered, making it borderline but functional.

    Completeness4/5

    The tool set covers the essential lifecycle of submitting scans and retrieving results, including public reports. Minor gaps exist, such as no ability to list or manage scans, but agents can work around this by tracking tokens externally.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessNo issues