Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to Redacta

  • A
    license
    A
    quality
    A
    maintenance
    PubCrawl provides LLMs with access to PubMed, FDA/UK drug labeling, and ClinicalTrials.gov. It enables searching literature, retrieving abstracts and full texts, comparing US and UK drug labels, and exploring clinical trials.
    2
    14
    73 npm
    15
    MIT
  • A
    license
    A
    quality
    A
    maintenance
    Deployment-readiness harness for AI document-QA and extraction systems. Scaffolds grounding checks, privacy redaction and cost tracking into a project, composing OpenGATE, Redacta and PubCrawl.
    2
    5
    11 npm
    1
    MIT

Related Servers

  • A
    license
    A
    quality
    A
    maintenance
    Local pseudonymisation MCP server that detects PII in text, replaces it with opaque tokens before sending to cloud LLMs, and restores tokens afterward.
    2
    199 npm
    2
    MIT
  • F
    license
    A
    quality
    C
    maintenance
    Detects and redacts sensitive personal information such as names, emails, phone numbers, ID numbers, and locations in text before it is processed by AI agents, using configurable mask, hash, or remove strategies.
    1
    -
  • A
    license
    A
    quality
    A
    maintenance
    Sanitizes text and files by removing PII, secrets, and custom patterns locally before sending to LLMs, with optional reverse-scrubbing.
    3
    507 npm
    2
    Cryptographic Autonomy 1.0 (Combined Work Exception)
  • A
    license
    A
    quality
    B
    maintenance
    Enables local detection of protected health information in source code before it reaches LLM prompts, log statements, or analytics calls.
    2
    89 npm
    MIT

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Scored across 7 tools

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: protect vs redact are differentiated by legacy status and return behavior, release_to_file vs reinstate by client vs server-side mapping, plus check_output, discard_session, and self_check each occupy unique roles. No ambiguity in selection.

Naming Consistency4/5

All tools use snake_case and a verb-first pattern, though the structure varies (protect, release_to_file, check_output, discard_session, redact, reinstate, self_check). The legacy tools follow the same style but the naming is consistent enough to be predictable.

Tool Count5/5

Seven tools is well-scoped for a redaction/restoration server: core redaction, restoration, leakage checking, session management, and legacy compatibility all have dedicated tools without bloating the surface.

Completeness5/5

The full lifecycle is covered: redaction (protect), restoration (release_to_file), output verification (check_output), session cleanup (discard_session), and leftover scanning (self_check), plus legacy paths. No obvious gaps for the intended domain.

Maintenance

ActivityActive
ResponsivenessNo issues