Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to SSIG MCP

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      C
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Web3 MCP proxy server for AI agents: EVM execution, DeFi swaps, bridges, advanced orders, market data, wallet management, and confirmation-gated writes.
      100
      30 npm
      1
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      A local MCP bridge that connects AI clients such as Claude Code, Cursor, Codex, ChatGPT, and Hermes to 2,000+ models and APIs, letting agents discover, inspect, and run search, social, scraping, finance, LLM, image, video, and audio capabilities behind a single browser sign-in. It keeps spending verifiable by exposing live schemas, pricing, run status, account balance, and rollback before anything executes.
      556,724 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to generate or import multi-chain keys, sign messages and unsigned transactions, broadcast them, and query native balances across Ambient, Solana, BSC, and Arbitrum. Private keys stay encrypted on the local machine, so agents can complete the sign-and-send half of a swap, liquidity, or bridge workflow handed over by a remote market server.
      10
      MIT
    • 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
      29
      MIT

    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

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessNo issues