fidacy-mcp
Related Servers
Alternatives to fidacy-mcp
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceProvides a three-layer payment firewall for AI agents, enabling identity verification, risk screening, and execution authorization with on-chain policy enforcement for secure and auditable transactions.113 npm2MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceStop AI agents leaking your card or making hallucinated purchases. No SaaS, No login, Fully local. A runtime security layer that protects AI agents during online purchases. It sits between the agent and payment forms75 npm1MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables AI agents to propose wallet payments while a local, human-authored policy decides whether each transaction is approved, requires human confirmation, or is refused, and records every decision in a signed, append-only ledger.-

emilia-mcp-serverofficial
AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceThe accountability layer for AI agents — a named human's signed yes before an agent does anything irreversible (payment, record change, deploy), then an offline-verifiable Trust Receipt. Apache-2.0, formally verified.3650Apache 2.0- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceCryptographic proof of consent for AI agents. Sign before you act. Policy engine enforces spending caps, action whitelists, and escalation rules. Independently verifiable by anyone.102Apache 2.0
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceNon-custodial agent wallet with a transaction preflight that decodes an unsigned EVM tx and flags drain patterns (unlimited/large approval, approve-all, token & NFT transferFrom, proxy upgrade, on-chain permit, approvals hidden in multicall) before signing.91MIT
TDQS
Scored across 12 tools
Most tools have clearly distinct purposes (e.g., request_payment vs assess_action vs anchor_artifact), but the read-only audit/reporting tools (spend_summary, list_decisions, explain_decision) overlap somewhat. Descriptions help differentiate them, but an agent could still mis-select between spend_summary and list_decisions.
The dominant pattern is verb_noun (request_payment, verify_mandate, get_audit_proof, etc.). However, 'sentinel_alerts' is a noun phrase and 'upgrade' is a bare verb, breaking the otherwise consistent style.
12 tools is well within the optimal 3-15 range. Each tool targets a specific aspect of the payment authorization, audit, artifact proofing, or account lifecycle, and none feel redundant or superfluous.
The main workflows are covered: payment authorization with mandates, audit trails, decision explanations, alerts, artifact anchoring/checking, and account upgrade/email registration. Slight gaps like no way to list all anchored artifacts or revoke an anchor are minor and likely beyond the server's intended scope.