Skip to main content
Glama
mrq1911

SSIG MCP

by mrq1911
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to SSIG MCP

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • web3agent

      Apegurus
      A
      license
      C
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Web3 MCP proxy server for AI agents: EVM execution, DeFi swaps, bridges, advanced orders, market data, wallet management, and confirmation-gated writes.
      100
      63 npm
      1
      MIT

    • waiaas

      waiaas
      A
      license
      C
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Self-hosted wallet MCP server for AI agents. Provides 42 tools for multi-chain crypto operations: transfers, token management, DeFi (swap, lend, stake, bridge, perp), NFT, smart contracts, and x402 payments. Supports EVM and Solana with policy engine, spending limits, and human approval.
      60
      31
      MIT

    • codex-bridge

      Fanch-hui
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables web-based ChatGPT and Qwen Studio to connect to local agents and projects, providing secure local file read/write, task execution, and approval workflows through a unified MCP bridge.
      140
      Apache 2.0
    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

    A4.2/5.0

    Scored across 6 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool has a distinct role: three chain-specific request tools, one status getter, one list, and one cancel. No two tools overlap in function; even the three request tools are clearly differentiated by chain.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., request_evm_transaction, get_transaction_request, list_transaction_requests). The pattern is uniform and predictable.

    Tool Count5/5

    Six tools is well-scoped for a transaction request manager: three chain-specific creation methods plus three lifecycle operations. Each tool earns its place without unnecessary duplication.

    Completeness5/5

    The tool surface covers the full lifecycle of transaction requests: create (for each supported chain), read (single and list), and cancel. No obvious gaps for the stated purpose.

    Maintenance

    ActivityStale
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources