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.

DimensionKSailAn SDK for creating, managing, and operating Kubernetes clusters and workloads.MartinLoop MCP ServerAn independent control layer that gives AI coding agents budgets, brakes, and receipts
FMRS41 / 100 · D79 / 100 · B
Reliability6 / 2012 / 20
Security and permissions6 / 2018 / 20
Maintenance11 / 2016 / 20
Documentation10 / 2018 / 20
Setup experience8 / 2015 / 20
Best for
  • Kubernetes developers and platform engineering teams
  • Teams needing local Kubernetes development environments
  • Users managing clusters through Docker or cloud providers
  • Projects using Flux, Argo CD, or SOPS
  • 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 needing only browser automation or file management
  • Environments where an MCP server should not perform cluster operations
  • Users requiring a documented tool list or client configuration that the source does not provide
  • 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
  • Docker or cloud-provider access, depending on the selected cluster provider
  • Kubernetes permissions required to create clusters, manage them, and operate workloads
  • Applicable cloud infrastructure permissions for cloud-based clusters
  • Access to relevant encryption keys when handling SOPS-managed secrets
  • 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
  • The server can be used to create and modify clusters and workloads, so incorrect operations may affect running environments
  • Cloud operations may change infrastructure or incur costs
  • Environments with access to SOPS keys must protect those keys appropriately
  • AWS EKS support is marked as under development in the source
  • 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 Code, Codex, Gemini CLI, Cursor, VS Code, GitHub Copilot, Continue
Tools00