zn-gate
OfficialRelated Servers
Alternatives to zn-gate
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceLocal-first security check for AI coding agents — finds hardcoded secrets, exposed .env files, git-history leaks and vulnerable dependencies (OSV), entirely on your machine. Ask your agent "is this safe to ship?" and get a Launch Readiness score with a fix for every finding.MIT

classifinder-mcpofficial
AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceEnables AI agents to scan text for leaked secrets and prompt injection markers, and redact them before reaching an LLM.21MIT- AlicenseNot gradedqualityNot gradedmaintenanceSecrets manager for AI coding agents. The model only sees secret names; values are injected into the child process at exec time, every command needs your approval in a native dialog, and output is redacted before it returns to the model.784 PyPIApache 2.0
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceScans text and files for common secrets (AWS, GitHub, etc.) and redacts them to prevent credential leakage in AI-assisted development. Runs entirely locally with no telemetry.MIT
- AlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceProvides local, dependency-free security scanning tools for LLM configurations, prompts, RAG sources, and more, enabling AI coding agents to detect prompt injections and other vulnerabilities without external network access.8MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceProvides cascading content protection for AI coding assistants by detecting and redacting PII, secrets, prompt injection, and system prompt leakage before they reach LLMs.12 npmMIT
TDQS
Scored across 4 tools
Each tool targets a distinct phase of the LLM pipeline: analyze_prompt handles user/agent input, check_tool_call inspects outbound tool invocations, check_tool_result inspects inbound tool outputs, and zn_status reports configuration. There is no meaningful overlap in purpose or timing, so an agent can select unambiguously.
All names use snake_case and are readable, with check_tool_call/check_tool_result forming a clean parallel pair. The minor deviations are analyze_prompt using a different verb and zn_status using no verb at all, but the convention is still largely predictable.
Four tools is exactly right for a security gate covering the three inspection checkpoints plus a status probe. Nothing is redundant and nothing feels padded or missing.
The surface covers the full lifecycle of a security gate: pre-prompt analysis, pre-execution tool call checking, post-execution result checking, and introspection via zn_status. No obvious operational gap remains for the stated domain.