Skip to main content
Glama
eliottreich

TaskBounty Check

Related Servers

Alternatives to TaskBounty Check

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Scans GitHub Actions workflow files for dangerous triggers, template injection, unpinned actions, excessive permissions, and secrets in shell commands before they are committed, exposing the checks as MCP tools for agents.
      2
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables MCP-compatible AI agents to scan code for leaked secrets, copyleft licenses, unprotected routes, missing privacy policies, and risky card handling before committing or shipping.
      40 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      CI health reports for GitHub Actions: flaky tests named from logs, wasted compute priced in dollars, zombie crons, PR feedback time, plus 21 lint rules with safe auto-fixes. Read-only MCP tools wrap the same Go binary.
      7
      2
      MIT
    • A
      license
      C
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      A policy-aware MCP server for GitHub and GitHub Actions that enables safe AI-assisted infrastructure workflows—inspecting repositories, preparing branches and pull requests, and constrained remote mutations behind explicit preview-bound approval tokens.
      18
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Local MCP server for AI agents and vibe coding safety: deterministic risk checks (payments, auth, database, secrets, infrastructure), sessions, checkpoints, policy inspection, and fix prompts. Runs over stdio against a local git repository; no language model judges risk.
      8
      1
      Apache 2.0
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Audits GitHub Actions workflow files for supply-chain risks like script injection, leaked tokens, unpinned actions, and broad permissions.
      -

    TDQS

    A4.1/5.0

    Scored across 3 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: scanning produces findings, explaining interprets them, and generating a fix plan suggests steps. There is no overlap in functionality.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (explain_finding, generate_fix_plan, scan_repo), making them predictable and easy to understand.

    Tool Count5/5

    With only 3 tools, the set is tightly scoped to a specific workflow (scan, explain, fix). This is appropriate for a focused server, avoiding unnecessary complexity.

    Completeness4/5

    The tools cover the main workflow from scanning to understanding to suggesting fixes. A minor gap is the lack of a tool to list all possible rules without scanning, but the workflow remains functional.

    Maintenance

    ActivityStale
    ResponsivenessNo issues