Skip to main content
Glama
toolscout

toolscout

by oemajans

Related Servers

Alternatives to toolscout

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to get evidence-backed allow, review, or block decisions before installing or invoking third-party tools, with trust-aware discovery, official docs search, and prediction-market risk preflight.
      1
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to prospect across GitHub, PyPI, and npm, searching repositories, packages, and code patterns with read-only tools.
      7
      77 PyPI
      5
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI coding agents to automatically verify npm packages against the live registry before installation, flagging hallucinated, slopsquatted, or otherwise suspicious packages with risk verdicts.
      2 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to discover open-source libraries worth reusing through multi-signal repository ranking and to search real code with sub-50ms local regex/semantic queries federated to live GitHub, grep.app, and package-registry backends. It exposes seven tools over stdio—repo search, code search, repo profile/tree, file and docs fetching, and a usage guide—with structured filters, typed pre-execution errors, and a byte-identical CLI twin.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI coding agents to verify, compare, and safely upgrade npm packages by scoring packages from public signals and sandboxed co-installation, detecting breaking API surface changes, and rewriting code that upgrades break.
      38 npm
      8
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables coding agents to check npm packages, GitHub Action refs, and remote scripts before execution, returning deterministic ALLOW/DENY/REVIEW verdicts with evidence and a re-checkable manifest.
      MIT

    TDQS

    A4.3/5.0

    Scored across 3 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    The three tools map to distinct workflow stages: search for candidates, assess one candidate's health, and read its README content. read_readme and assess_repository both operate on a single candidate and could initially be confused, but the descriptions clearly separate content inspection from metadata/security scoring.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All three names follow a strict verb_noun snake_case pattern (read_readme, search_repositories, assess_repository). No deviations in style or casing.

    Tool Count5/5

    Three tools form a tight, non-redundant pipeline (discover -> verify health -> read content) exactly matching the tool-scout purpose. Nothing feels padded, and each tool covers a necessary step.

    Completeness4/5

    The core lifecycle of finding, vetting, and inspecting a tool is covered, including security signals (OSV, Scorecard) and deprecation status. Minor gaps exist, such as no side-by-side comparison of multiple candidates or fetching install/config details, but agents can work around these by repeated calls.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues