BugBounty MCP Server
Related Servers
Alternatives to BugBounty MCP Server
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseBqualityBmaintenanceEnables AI agents to conduct authorized pentests and bug-bounty workflows with scope enforcement, audit logging, reconnaissance, safe vulnerability checks, payload/wordlist generation, and professional report generation.14MIT
- AlicenseCqualityDmaintenanceEnables AI agents to orchestrate 25+ security tools for penetration testing through natural language, automating scans, vulnerability detection, and report generation.31MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceAI-powered cybersecurity automation platform with 150+ security tools and 12+ autonomous AI agents for penetration testing, vulnerability assessment, and bug bounty hunting. Enables comprehensive security testing through intelligent tool selection and automated workflows.3-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables AI assistants to perform authorized security testing and penetration testing operations including SSL/TLS analysis, port scanning, vulnerability scanning, and HTTP security header audits through natural language interactions.1MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceIntegrates 7 security tools (nmap, nuclei, dirsearch, sqlmap, hydra, Acunetix, Metasploit) via MCP protocol for AI-assisted penetration testing with enterprise-grade safety features.1MIT
- AlicenseCqualityDmaintenanceEnables AI agents to generate and manage specialized bug bounty hunting workflows including reconnaissance, vulnerability testing, OSINT gathering, and file upload testing. Provides REST API endpoints for comprehensive security assessments with intelligence-driven vulnerability prioritization.402MIT
TDQS
Scored across 53 tools
Most tools target a clearly distinct security check, and descriptions carefully separate actions like http_probe vs batch_http_probe or csp_analysis vs headers_analysis. However, several clusters overlap in purpose—subdomain_enumeration/subfinder/amass/assetfinder all discover subdomains, while web_directory_scan/sensitive_file_exposure_scan/web_metadata_discovery/openapi_discovery all probe paths—so some misselection is possible.
All tools use snake_case with descriptive, domain-specific names, and CRUD tools follow a verb_noun pattern. Suffix conventions vary (_analysis, _scan, _discovery, _enumeration, _probe), but there is no casing or style mixing, so names remain predictable.
53 tools far exceeds the practical 3–15 range and clearly passes the 50+ extreme threshold. While many tools are individually distinct security checks, the sheer number burdens tool selection and increases overlap in an agent-facing MCP server.
The surface covers scope validation, broad reconnaissance (DNS, subdomains, ports, web paths), specialized analyses, external scanners, and a finding/reporting lifecycle. Minor gaps include no delete_finding and no manual HTTP request, fuzzing, or exploitation tool, but core bug-bounty workflows are well supported.