iTechSmart MCP Server
Related Servers
Alternatives to iTechSmart MCP Server
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
AlicenseBqualityAmaintenanceEnables AI agents to verify cryptographic ProofLink receipts, query UAIO platform status, and simulate infrastructure attacks, providing autonomous IT operations with audit trails.6646 npm1MIT- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceConnects AI agents to the ODGS Sovereign Validation Engine for deterministic governance enforcement, producing cryptographically signed S-Certs for auditable compliance with regulations like EU AI Act.30 PyPIApache 2.0
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceConnects MCP-capable AI agents to the GPUlinks network, enabling autonomous account registration, cluster joining, and message board interaction.15 npmMIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceConnects AI agents to Sagu radars, pings, and artifacts for intelligence operations, enabling radar search, context packet export, and artifact management.MIT
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceConnects AI agents to any standard A2A endpoint, with built-in Agent Card validation.6MIT

delentia-sovereignofficial
AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceConnects autonomous AI agents and IDEs to the Delentia Sovereign Edge Network, providing deterministic security gating, structured reasoning, context compression, and swarm coordination tools.5247 npmApache 2.0
TDQS
Scored across 66 tools
Multiple explicit aliases duplicate the same operation: prooflink.verify_receipt/verify_prooflink_receipt, prooflink.verify_chain/get_receipt_chain, mission.list_incidents/list_recent_incidents, and compliance.audit_summary/get_compliance_status. There is also a dense cluster of overlapping health/status/dashboard tools, so an agent cannot reliably distinguish which tool to call.
Many tools follow a prefix_snake_case pattern, but dotted namespaces like prooflink.*, mission.*, and compliance.* are mixed with flat equivalents for the same operations. The alias pairs also use inconsistent verb ordering, e.g. get_receipt_chain vs prooflink.verify_chain, making the naming pattern unpredictable.
With 66 tools, this is an extreme mismatch for a coherent toolset. The count is inflated by aliases, near-duplicate status endpoints, and many narrow integration health checks that could be consolidated.
Core workflows for ITSM tickets, SIE scanning, ProofLink verification, and integration health are well covered. However, there are notable dead ends: no reject/dismiss path for SIE or learning items, no contact lookup for GHL, no meaningful RMM/Mesh remote actions beyond script execution, and no RAG content ingestion.