Skip to main content
Glama
echelongraph

EchelonGraph MCP Server

Official
by echelongraph
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

Related Servers

Alternatives to EchelonGraph MCP Server

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • purify-feeds-mcp

      eason4kim-rocket
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      MCP server for querying live CISA KEV, EPSS, and enriched vulnerability feeds with full provenance. Enables natural-language access to auditable security-intelligence data from Claude Desktop and other MCP clients.
      MIT

    • vuln-intel-mcp

      rohanrajnist
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Provides CVE lookup, search, and exploit intelligence from public vulnerability sources (NVD, CISA KEV, EPSS) for AI agents to produce remediation guidance without consuming LLM tokens for data fetching.
      1
      MIT

    • CVE Intelligence MCP

      munyong-mmy
      F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables querying official CVE List V5 records enriched with CISA KEV data, including single or batch CVE lookups and required-action guidance for known exploited vulnerabilities.
      -

    • vulnscan-mcp

      hardikthakker19
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to search, correlate, and monitor real-time vulnerability intelligence from NVD, CISA KEV, EPSS, and MITRE ATT&CK, including CVE details, critical CVE tracking, known exploited vulnerabilities, and exploitation probability scores.
      5
      2
      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

    A3.9/5.0

    Scored across 5 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Each tool has a fairly distinct role: cve_summary gives aggregate counts, search_cves browses/lists, get_cve fetches one CVE's detail, cve_exposure is per-CVE footprint, and exposure_radar is cross-domain aggregate. The main risk is cve_summary vs search_cves, which both surface CVE feed data and could be confused when a user wants counts.

    Naming Consistency3/5

    Naming is consistently snake_case but mixes verb_noun (get_cve, search_cves) with bare noun phrases (cve_summary, cve_exposure, exposure_radar). The inconsistency between verb-led and noun-led names means the pattern isn't predictable, though all names are readable and domain-specific.

    Tool Count5/5

    Five tools is well-scoped for a CVE intelligence and exposure-radar service, covering summary, detail, search, per-CVE exposure, and aggregate radar. Each tool earns its place without redundancy.

    Completeness4/5

    The surface covers CVE lookup, search, aggregation, per-CVE exposure, and cross-domain radar totals, which is solid lifecycle coverage for an intelligence feed. There is no explicit way to browse tracked products/KEV lists independently, but search and the radar aggregates largely work around that.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessUnresponsive

    Resources