Skip to main content
Glama
sebastienrousseau

iso20022-evidence-pack-mcp

by sebastienrousseau
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Related Servers

Alternatives to iso20022-evidence-pack-mcp

  • iso20022-mcp

    sebastienrousseau
    F
    license
    A
    quality
    A
    maintenance
    Unified gateway for ISO 20022 message families, providing meta-tools to search, describe, validate, generate, and parse financial messages.
    7
    43 PyPI
    1
    -

Related Servers

  • ArtifactGuard

    blackcow4234-lab
    F
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    B
    maintenance
    Enables AI agents to validate deliverables (JSON, ZIP, PDF, DOCX) against signed contracts, generating verifiable receipts with Ed25519 signatures.
    -

  • compliance-aiops

    AIops-tools
    A
    license
    A
    quality
    A
    maintenance
    Converts audit trails from AIops agents into framework-mapped, tamper-evident compliance evidence bundles for HIPAA, PCI-DSS, SOC 2, and GDPR.
    19
    MIT

  • action-ledger

    SweetKenneth
    A
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    C
    maintenance
    Enables recording agent proposals, executions, redactions and annotations into an append-only, hash-linked evidence chain, then exporting a self-contained range and verifying offline from the export's own bytes alone so a third party can check history without trusting the agent runtime or its storage.
    MIT

  • proofspec

    christian140903-sudo
    A
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    B
    maintenance
    Enables defining and verifying evidence contracts for claims in READMEs, releases, or product pages using constrained verifiers and generating hash-chained receipts and reports.
    6 npm
    MIT
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

A3.7/5.0

Scored across 11 tools

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools target a distinct operation (seal, build, render, export, verify external artifacts), but the three signing tools -- sign_pack, sign_pack_aws_kms, sign_pack_vault -- share the same core action and are distinguished mainly by backend. The three verify tools are also similar in name, though their inputs make the artifact types clear.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names generally follow a verb_noun pattern (seal_pack, build_evidence_pack, render_markdown, export_pack_to_s3), and the provider-specific signing tools add a consistent _aws_kms/_vault suffix. Minor inconsistency exists between verify_seal, verify_pack_signature, verify_slsa_provenance, and verify_cosign_signature, which mix 'verify' with different object structures.

Tool Count5/5

Eleven tools is well within the ideal range for a specialized evidence-pack domain. Each tool maps to a distinct phase of the lifecycle -- build, seal, verify, render, sign, export, and external provenance checks -- without redundant or filler tools.

Completeness4/5

The set covers the evidence-pack lifecycle well: creation, sealing, seal verification, rendering, local signing, signature verification, and S3 export. Notable gaps are the lack of KMS/Vault signature verification counterparts and no S3 retrieval/listing, but these are workaround-able rather than blocking for the core workflow.

Maintenance

ActivityActive
ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources