Skip to main content
Glama
MCP Airlock

MCP Airlock

by lara-muhanna

Related Servers

Alternatives to MCP Airlock

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables secure runtime mediation of tool requests from MCP-connected AI agents, enforcing least-privilege policies, validating intent and inputs, detecting multi-step attacks and information leaks, and supporting explainable decisions, audit trails, and human approval for sensitive actions.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables secure interaction between LLMs and MCP tools by applying zero-trust security controls, including sensitive data masking, file system protection, and policy enforcement.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables production-hardened MCP tool serving with OAuth 2.1 audience-restricted tokens, purpose-bound tools, human-in-the-loop approvals, containment, and audit trails for AI agents.
      Apache 2.0
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables LLM agents to enforce security policies by authorizing tool calls, scanning for prompt injection, checking memory writes, redacting PII, and accessing audit trails through MCP.
      -
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to reach upstream MCP tool servers through a central policy gateway that authenticates each agent, enforces least-privilege and default-deny rules, and applies response obligations such as redaction, inference stripping, PII masking, and truncation. It also records every decision in a tamper-evident, hash-chained audit log that can be verified later.
      Apache 2.0
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enforces fine-grained, context-aware access control on MCP tool calls, with a tamper-evident, replayable audit log that records denials and verifies every decision.
      MIT

    TDQS

    C2.9/5.0

    Scored across 4 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Each tool targets a distinct function (provenance auditing, capability issuance, generic HTTP fetching, and weather retrieval) with minimal overlap. An agent can easily distinguish when to use each based on the task requirements.

    Naming Consistency3/5

    Mixed naming patterns: two tools use 'airlock_' prefix with verbs (issue, audit_tail), while others use 'http_' prefix or no prefix (weather_hourly). The weather tool breaks the verb-first convention used by others, using a noun-adjective pattern instead.

    Tool Count3/5

    Four tools is acceptably compact but the set suffers from scope confusion, mixing core Airlock security functions with unrelated utility tools (weather, HTTP). This feels like two different servers merged together rather than a cohesive toolset.

    Completeness2/5

    The Airlock domain (capability management) is severely underdeveloped, offering only issuance and audit tail reading without revocation, validation, or capability listing. The utility tools (weather, HTTP) are also minimal, offering only hourly forecasts and GET requests without parameter customization.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessSyncing