M
MCP Directory CURATED DIRECTORY
911 MCP servers indexed
中文
← Back to directory
COMPARE UP TO 4 SERVERS

Compare MCP servers

Compare scores, permissions, risks, and fit in one decision-focused table.

DimensionPostman MCP ServerAn MCP server providing access to the Postman APIMartinLoop MCP ServerAn independent control layer that gives AI coding agents budgets, brakes, and receipts
FMRS49 / 100 · D79 / 100 · B
Reliability7 / 2012 / 20
Security and permissions8 / 2018 / 20
Maintenance9 / 2016 / 20
Documentation13 / 2018 / 20
Setup experience12 / 2015 / 20
Best for
  • Teams running complex, multi-step Postman operations through AI assistants
  • Developers automating test workflows and API documentation upkeep
  • Postman users managing many collections and environments
  • Engineering teams scaling AI coding agents while controlling spend
  • Platform teams that need auditable, rollback-aware agent execution records
  • Organizations using multiple agents (Claude, Codex, Gemini) under one governed flow
Not for
  • Users who only need simple collection runs or single API calls
  • Developer-driven local iteration better served by CLI or direct API use
  • Anyone expecting an officially maintained Postman server (this is a community project)
  • Developers who just want a simple code-completion helper without run governance
  • Teams unwilling to accept local JSONL run records with HMAC signing
  • Environments without a supported adapter (Claude/Codex/Gemini CLIs, direct provider, or verifier-only)
Required permissions
  • Requires a Postman API key with access to the relevant resources (POSTMAN_API_KEY)
  • The API key grants access to all Postman resources the account has permissions for
  • Supports role-based permissions at workspace and collection levels
  • Read/write access to the configured repo root (writable scope restrictable via --allow-path/--deny-path)
  • Ability to invoke the chosen agent CLI (Claude/Codex/Gemini, etc.) and its underlying model account
  • Local disk writes for run records, receipts, and share outputs (share/run-receipt., etc.)
  • Execution of user-configured verifier commands (e.g. npm test)
Risks and side effects
  • Project is under active development with potential breaking changes
  • Code is AI-generated (Cline with Claude 3.5 Sonnet) and should be reviewed carefully
  • The API key has broad access; leaking it could expose Postman resources to modification or deletion
  • The server communicates over stdio, which makes debugging harder
  • Verifier commands are executed; poorly chosen verifier commands carry security risk despite preflight policy checks
  • Cost and token figures may be estimates (labeled with provenance) and should not be treated as settled accounting
  • Receipt integrity must be verified before use as trustworthy evidence; missing rollback evidence is flagged as EVIDENCE_BOUNDARY
  • Policy defaults come from martin.config.yaml and can be overridden by CLI flags; misconfiguration can loosen safety boundaries
Supported clientsClaude Desktop, Cline, ZedClaude Code, Codex, Gemini CLI, Cursor, VS Code, GitHub Copilot, Continue
Tools00