mcp-latchpoint
Related Servers
Alternatives to mcp-latchpoint
AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceTracks buying and momentum signals for companies, such as funding rounds, senior hires, office openings, customer wins, and partnerships, with each event carrying its date.106 npmMIT
Related Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceAudits MCP server configurations and packages for security risks such as typosquats, credential exposure, and malicious code, with zero dependencies and no execution.1MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceAudits MCP server configurations for security risks including capability inventory, SSRF, prompt injection, and drift detection. Works in read-only mode and can also be used as an MCP server to let AI agents audit their own attack surface.132 PyPI4MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityFmaintenanceScans MCP servers for security hardening issues including capability declarations, transport, and tool descriptions.1-
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceSecurity scanning for MCP servers from the inside out. Provides runtime inspection, AST-based static analysis, config audit, dependency analysis, and OWASP MCP Top 10 compliance in a single MCP server.55140 npm6MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceA read-only MCP server that lets an agent audit its own environment by discovering local MCP configurations and skill folders on Windows, macOS, and Linux and running offline static checks for prompt injection, hidden instructions, hardcoded secrets, dangerous commands, unpinned packages, and excessive filesystem or transport permissions. It exposes tools to scan everything discovered, list configurations, vet a single skill, or analyze supplied text, returning text, JSON, SARIF, or HTML findings with CI-friendly severity levels.0MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceA read-only MCP server that lets agents scan a project's AI agent setup — Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, MCP servers and instruction files — and surface security findings such as the lethal trifecta, broad permissions, exposed secrets and unpinned packages.1,730 npmMIT
TDQS
Scored across 2 tools
list_rules enumerates audit rules while scan analyzes a config file or directory—two clearly distinct purposes targeting different objects (rule metadata vs. actual files). No overlap or confusion.
list_rules follows a clean verb_noun pattern, but scan is a bare verb without a noun target, a minor deviation from the convention. Still readable and predictable overall.
Two tools is borderline thin for an audit/lint server; listing rules and running a scan are essential, but the surface feels minimal for the apparent scanning domain.
The core discover-then-scan workflow exists, but there's no way to fetch a single rule's detail, filter by severity, or apply/view remediation beyond what list_rules returns. Notable gaps limit deeper audit workflows.