Skip to main content
Glama
kaditang

402sentinel-mcp

by kaditang

Related Servers

Alternatives to 402sentinel-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      MCP server that scores the behavioral risk of a wallet on Base before sending it money. Provides a risk score, verdict, and explainable flags based on USDC payment history.
      2
      47 npm
      Apache 2.0
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      MCP server for verifying blockchain safety on Base via x402, with free pricing/receipt tools and paid per-call guard, contract, and metadata checks settled in USDC.
      47 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      B
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      MCP server for AML/KYT crypto wallet screening, enabling AI clients to check wallet risk scores, source-of-funds tags, activity dates, and volume totals via Satoshkin backend.
      1
      87 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      An MCP server for agentic commerce, enabling AI agents to discover services, make x402 payments with USDC across multiple chains, and manage crypto wallets and token swaps.
      415 npm
      1
      MIT

    TDQS

    A3.7/5.0

    Scored across 10 tools

    Disambiguation2/5

    assess_counterparty and assess_counterparty_deep are near-identical except for depth and price, so the boundary is fuzzy. recommend_policy largely duplicates the recommended_policy already returned by assess_counterparty, and compliance_check reuses counterparty due-diligence signals, creating several overlapping tool purposes.

    Naming Consistency3/5

    All tools use snake_case, but the grammatical pattern is mixed: assess_counterparty, recommend_policy, report_outcome, and verify_service are verb-first, while firewall, compliance_check, firewall_record, and firewall_outcome are noun-first or noun compounds. The names remain readable and generally predictable, but the convention is inconsistent.

    Tool Count5/5

    Ten tools is well within the ideal range and appropriately maps to the server's risk-assessment purpose. Each major workflow—counterparty risk, payment firewall, compliance, RWA checks, feedback loops, and service verification—has representation without excessive bloat.

    Completeness4/5

    The tool set covers the core pre-payment lifecycle well: counterparty vetting, payment-instruction security, compliance screening, RWA assessment, and outcome feedback. Minor gaps exist around directly managing or retrieving generated policies and querying the verified-service list, but agents can work around these.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues