Skip to main content
Glama
crowdsecurity

crowdsec-local-mcp

Official
by crowdsecurity
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to crowdsec-local-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • Fastly NGWAF MCP Server

      purpleax
      A
      license
      B
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Provides seamless integration with Fastly's Next-Gen Web Application Firewall API, enabling AI assistants to manage web application security through natural language interactions.
      29
      1
      MIT

    • Wazuh Servidor MCP

      nks1097
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables natural language interaction with Wazuh SIEM for alert querying, threat hunting, vulnerability scanning, and active response actions.
      MIT
    • Imperva Cloud WAF MCP Server by ThalesGroup

      Imperva Cloud WAF MCP Serverofficial

      ThalesGroup
      A
      license
      B
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI assistants to query and analyze Imperva Cloud WAF configurations through natural language, supporting retrieval of sites, domains, policies, and rules.
      4
      7
      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

    B3.1/5.0

    Scored across 24 tools

    Disambiguation2/5

    Many tools have overlapping purposes, especially the prompt-getting tools (get_waf_top_level_prompt, get_waf_prompt, get_waf_examples, generate_waf_rule). The testing workflow is ambiguous between run_waf_tests, manage_waf_stack, and curl_waf_endpoint. Agents could easily confuse which tool to use for a given task.

    Naming Consistency3/5

    Most names use snake_case with verb_noun pattern, but verbs vary inconsistently (get, generate, validate, lint, deploy, prepare, fetch, manage, curl, explain, test). Some tools omit the 'waf' prefix (e.g., fetch_nuclei_exploit, manage_scenario_stack) breaking the pattern. The naming is readable but not uniform.

    Tool Count3/5

    24 tools is on the higher side, but the server covers two distinct domains (WAF rules and scenarios). However, many prompt-related tools could be consolidated (e.g., get_waf_prompt, get_waf_top_level_prompt, get_waf_examples). The count feels slightly bloated.

    Completeness4/5

    The tool set covers the full lifecycle for both WAF rules and scenarios: generation, validation, linting, testing, deployment, and PR preparation. Minor gaps like missing a direct 'update' operation, but the domain is authoring-oriented, which is well-covered.

    Maintenance

    ActivitySlowing
    ResponsivenessUnresponsive

    Resources