Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
intruder-mcp

intruder-mcp

Official
by intruder-io
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Related Servers

Alternatives to intruder-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • AI Browser

      luizgdemarchi
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      A local MCP server that lets Claude Code and Codex drive your real, already-logged-in Chrome — reading pages, clicking, typing, filling forms, navigating, managing tabs and taking screenshots — without Playwright. It pairs with a companion extension over a local WebSocket, with an on/off switch and a domain blocklist so the AI acts only where you allow.
      MIT

    • cursor-mcp-server

      bbarney7
      F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      An MCP server wrapping the Cursor CLI agent, enabling Claude Code and other MCP clients to delegate tasks to Cursor's AI agent for file writing, bash commands, and codebase queries.
      -

    • Boxline MCP server

      Boxline-dev
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables MCP clients such as Claude and Cursor to control an isolated cloud machine with a real browser, shell, filesystem, and web access, so agents can navigate pages, click and type, run commands, manage files, and search or fetch web content.
      26
      14 npm
      1
      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

    A3.5/5.0

    Scored across 21 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Tools map cleanly to distinct resources and actions (scans, schedules, targets, tags, issues, occurrences), so misselection is unlikely. Minor overlap exists between get_scan/list_scans and list_occurrences/get_scanner_output, but the single-vs-list and output-vs-metadata distinctions are clear enough.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Every tool follows a strict verb_noun pattern (get_status, create_scan, list_targets, delete_scan_schedule, etc.) with no style mixing. The only trivial wrinkle is plural 'create_targets' vs singular tag tools, which does not impede predictability.

    Tool Count4/5

    21 tools is on the heavier side but justified by a genuinely broad domain spanning scans, schedules, targets, tags, issues, occurrences, licenses, and user context. Each tool corresponds to a distinct operation, though a few (get_status, get_user) are minor conveniences.

    Completeness4/5

    Core lifecycle coverage is strong: schedules have full CRUD, scans support create/list/get/cancel, and targets/issues/occurrences support the main workflow operations. Gaps like no single get_target, no get_issue detail, and no update_target are minor and workable around.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessSyncing

    Resources