Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to teeshield

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Security scanner for MCP servers — vet an MCP before you wire it into an agent. Detects prompt-injection, credential exfiltration (via taint analysis), RCE, and supply-chain risks, and catches cross-server exfil chains no single server reveals. Zero-dependency local CLI, SARIF output, CI-gateable, no account.
      42 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      C
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Security scanner and MCP server that catches dangerous patterns in MCP servers and AI agent projects, such as leaked secrets, shell execution, and prompt-injection text. Runs as both a CLI and MCP server with CI-friendly severity gates.
      2
      1
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Security scanner and runtime proxy for MCP servers. Catches tool poisoning, prompt injection, and rug-pull attacks (silent tool description changes) before they reach your AI agent. Includes a static scanner and a runtime stdio proxy.
      59 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Security scanner for MCP servers. Detects prompt injection, command injection, auth bypass, and excessive permissions across tools, resources, and prompts.
      8 npm
      2
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Scans MCP servers for prompt-injection, tool-poisoning, and SSRF vulnerabilities using 30+ canonical rules across 5 severity tiers, with optional signed safety reports for procurement.
      5
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      MCP server that detects and guards against tool poisoning and prompt injection attacks in tool descriptions and schemas. It provides risk scoring, pattern detection, safe rewriting, and audit reports with zero external API cost.
      MIT

    TDQS

    A4.4/5.0

    Scored across 2 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    The two tools target completely different security domains—agent installations vs MCP servers—with no functional overlap. An agent can easily distinguish which to use based on the target.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Both tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern: check_agent_security and scan_mcp_server. The naming is predictable and immediately conveys purpose.

    Tool Count4/5

    With only two tools, the server is minimal but well-scoped to its purpose of security scanning. Each tool covers a distinct area, and adding more would risk bloat. However, a third tool for scanning server configurations could be justified.

    Completeness4/5

    The set covers the two primary use cases implied by the server name 'teeshield': scanning agents and scanning MCP servers. Agent scanning includes configuration and skills; MCP scanning includes vulnerabilities and description quality. Minor gaps like scanning for network security or runtime behavior might exist, but are outside the stated scope.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessUnresponsive