Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MCP Guard Scan

MCP Guard Scan

by diegoperezg7
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to MCP Guard Scan

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • MCPSentinel

      gentaArnezzi
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Security scanner for MCP servers that detects tool poisoning, shadowing, and other risks via static rules and semantic analysis. Exposes the scan_mcp_server tool for scanning MCP servers over stdio.
      1
      26 PyPI
      1
      MIT

    • mcp-security-scanner

      badchars
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Security scanning for MCP servers from the inside out. Provides runtime inspection, AST-based static analysis, config audit, dependency analysis, and OWASP MCP Top 10 compliance in a single MCP server.
      55
      140 npm
      6
      MIT

    • agent-audit

      piiiico
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Security scanner for MCP servers. Detects prompt injection, command injection, auth bypass, and excessive permissions across tools, resources, and prompts.
      19 npm
      3
      MIT

    • mcp-security-audit

      LuciferForge
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Security auditor for MCP servers that enumerates tools, resources, and prompts, scans for injection patterns, classifies risk levels, and produces a scored report (0-100, grades A-F).
      16 PyPI
      2
      MIT

    • mcp-fortress

      mcp-fortress
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Scans MCP servers for security vulnerabilities, prompt injection, and tool poisoning, providing risk scores and protection.
      4
      MIT
    Deploy Server
    Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

    TDQS

    A4.2/5.0

    Scored across 4 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    The two scan tools are clearly separated by input source: scan_tools_export operates offline on a pasted/exported tools list, while scan_server connects to a live HTTP endpoint and additionally checks transport. list_rules vs explain_rule is a clean list/detail split. No two tools can plausibly be mistaken for one another.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All four names follow the same snake_case verb_noun convention (scan_tools_export, scan_server, list_rules, explain_rule), with unambiguous verbs (scan/list/explain). scan_tools_export is a slightly longer object phrase but is still the same pattern.

    Tool Count5/5

    Four tools is well-scoped for a scanning server: one offline scan, one live scan, one rule catalog, one rule detail view. Nothing feels padded or redundant, and the split between static and live scanning justifies the two scan entry points.

    Completeness4/5

    The lifecycle is covered: discover rules, understand a rule, scan imported data, scan a live server. Minor gaps remain, such as filtering rules by category/severity in list_rules, machine-readable (e.g. JSON/SARIF) finding output, or scanning non-tool surfaces (prompts/resources) from an export; agents can work around these.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources