Skip to main content
Glama
cody-aigov

ai-governance-controls

by cody-aigov
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Related Servers

Alternatives to ai-governance-controls

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • @palveron/mcp-server

      palveron
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Provides advisory AI-governance checks for MCP hosts and coding agents, enabling policy verdicts, PII masking, and audit traces before executing tool calls.
      3
      45 npm
      MIT
    • evav-gateway by evavai

      evav-gatewayofficial

      evavai
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Governed MCP gateway that lets AI agents call tools with policy enforcement, prompt-injection screening, a kill-switch, and tamper-evident signed audit logs.
      Apache 2.0

    • AEGIS Governance

      undercurrentai
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Quantitative governance gate for AI agents. Six gates (risk, profit, novelty, complexity, quality, utility) return PROCEED/PAUSE/HALT/ESCALATE with confidence scores and hash-chained, tamper-evident audit trails. Generates NIST AI RMF and EU AI Act Annex IV artifacts. 10 MCP tools; local stdio and hosted Streamable HTTP with a free tier.
      MIT
    • AgentsGate by agentsgate

      AgentsGateofficial

      agentsgate
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to securely call MCP tools with risk scoring, checkpoints, rollback, and approval workflows.
      13 npm
      MIT
    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

    A3.6/5.0

    Scored across 3 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool targets a distinct governance activity: red teaming, risk classification, and safety screening. No overlap in purpose, making them easily distinguishable for an agent.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    All tools use snake_case with 'ai_' prefix and a descriptive term + action. 'ai_red_team' slightly deviates as noun-noun versus verb-noun in others, but the pattern is mostly consistent.

    Tool Count3/5

    Three tools cover core governance areas but feel minimal for a comprehensive governance suite. The count is acceptable for a focused server but borderline low for broader coverage.

    Completeness2/5

    Only three of many possible AI governance controls are implemented (e.g., missing bias, privacy, explainability). Moreover, tools return analysis frameworks rather than performing actual analysis, leaving significant gaps.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources