Skip to main content
Glama
kalala252

asm-mcp-server

by kalala252
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to asm-mcp-server

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • passive_dorks_server

      rjrb8
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables passive OSINT reconnaissance by providing search dorking and open-source intelligence collection tools through MCP, without requiring active interaction with target systems.
      MIT

    • groundwork

      Des-Sleigh
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to perform grounded web research with injection resistance, claim verification, and cost-aware routing through MCP tools like web_search, fetch_url, extract_claims, and check_grounding.
      MIT

    • erlik-graph

      malkreide
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables LLMs to perform OSINT link-analysis by exposing transforms (DNS, WHOIS, Shodan, etc.) as MCP tools for autonomous investigation and graph enrichment.
      MIT

    • periscope-mcp

      NLY22
      A
      license
      C
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Gives any MCP client 27 tools for turning scattered feeds, forums, and media into a persistent, searchable evidence corpus, so an agent can search and import evidence, verify claims with independent-source counting and citation checks, and run multi-round research that produces cited, revisable reports. It also supports adaptive retrieval widening, tiered evidence where only author-written sections count as sources, and honest degradation when no LLM key is available.
      27
      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

    A3.6/5.0

    Scored across 6 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool has a clearly distinct role: scan_domain initiates a scan, list_reports lists report metadata, get_report_summary provides a detailed summary, list_assets retrieves asset data, get_evidence pulls evidence, and list_vulnerabilities returns vulnerability data. There is no meaningful overlap between these operations.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tool names follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern: scan_domain, list_reports, get_report_summary, list_assets, get_evidence, list_vulnerabilities. The verb choice consistently indicates whether the tool creates or retrieves information.

    Tool Count5/5

    Six tools is a well-scoped size for an attack surface management/recon server. Each tool maps to a distinct step in the workflow: scan, report listing, summary, asset enumeration, evidence retrieval, and vulnerability listing.

    Completeness4/5

    The core reconnaissance workflow is well covered: scan a domain, view reports, inspect summaries, list assets, retrieve evidence, and see vulnerabilities. Minor gaps exist around report lifecycle management, such as deleting or updating reports, but users can complete the primary investigation workflow without dead ends.

    Maintenance

    ActivitySlowing
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources