Skip to main content
Glama
loicfontaine-max

qorami-mcp

Related Servers

Alternatives to qorami-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      F
      maintenance
      An email operating system for AI agents that provides safe triage, drafting, and searching of emails with unbypassable hard-stops on money, banking changes, first-contact senders, and prompt injection.
      12
      0
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Gives AI agents their own email address with inbound parsing, classification, extraction, and prompt injection screening, plus tools to manage mailboxes, send/receive emails, and handle draft approval workflows.
      14
      24 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to run real email operations across multiple IMAP/SMTP and provider OAuth accounts — syncing, searching, reading, drafting, attaching, and sending mail — while requiring explicit human approval for sending, deleting, or forwarding and recording an inspectable audit trail.
      230,096 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      F
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to send and receive email with enforced security policies, scoped mailboxes, and human approval for external sending.
      1
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Human-in-the-loop approval inbox for AI agents: an agent proposes an action (send email, post comment, run a command), a human approves, rejects, or edits it from a web, mobile, or Slack/Discord/Telegram inbox, and the agent only runs on approval. Full audit trail, self-hostable (MIT).
      8
      6
      MIT

    TDQS

    A4.4/5.0

    Scored across 2 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: verify_email handles the initial permission check, and check_action_status polls the result of a human confirmation request. There is no overlap.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Both tool names follow the verb_noun pattern (verify_email, check_action_status) and use snake_case consistently.

    Tool Count3/5

    With only 2 tools, the set is on the thin side for a standalone MCP server, but it covers the core email verification workflow without unnecessary additions.

    Completeness5/5

    The tools cover the entire permission lifecycle: initial decision via verify_email and subsequent polling for human confirmation via check_action_status. No obvious gaps for the intended domain.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessUnresponsive