by jagmarques · MCP Server · ★ 564
Last updated: · Indexed by AgentSkillsHub · Auto-synced every 8h
npm install @asqav/sdkTaken from the project's README on GitHub. Check the security audit before running it.
None of the 42 rules matched — no credential harvesting, no data exfiltration, no curl-pipe-shell installer. Scanned against 42 published rules built on the SlowMist agent-security taxonomy, refreshed every 8 hours. Full audit →
The quality score combines nine heuristic checks of the repo and its README: completeness, clarity, specificity, examples, structure, agent readiness, step-by-step content, instruction quality and security notes. It rates how well the project explains itself to an agent, not the code.
| Stars | 564 |
| Forks | 30 |
| Language | Python |
| Category | MCP Server |
| Quality Score | 68/100 |
| Last Updated | 2026-10-24 |
| Created | 2026-01-14 |
| Platforms | mcp, python |
| Est. Tokens | ~17k |
The evidence layer for AI agents. Audit trails, approvals, policy gates, and compliance reports for every action. Website | Docs | SDK Guide | Compliance Asqav SDK - Python + TypeScript T
Looking for a asqav-sdk alternative? If you're comparing asqav-sdk with other mcp server tools, these 6 projects are the closest alternatives on Agent Skills Hub — ranked by topic overlap, star count, and community traction.
AI agent identity, signed credentials, delegated authority and portable governance evidence. Python core and o
The Operating System for Scalable Enterprise AI Agents - Run, orchestrate, and deploy Compliant Enterprise AI
Decision audit trail + persistent memory for AI trading agents. Outcome-weighted recall, tamper-evident SHA-25
Model-agnostic plug-n-play LangChain/LangGraph agents powered entirely by MCP tools over HTTP/SSE.
Authority control plane for autonomous work. EMILIA Gate enforces finite customer-owned mandates at protected
Runtime policy enforcement for AI agents. Cryptographic audit trail, human-in-the-loop approvals, kill switch.
Explore other popular mcp server tools:
Grades come from a rule-based scan built on the SlowMist agent-security taxonomy: 42 published rules, covering credential harvesting, data exfiltration, curl | sh installers and more. It is a first-layer scan, not a manual audit — we say so rather than overstate it.
The scale of the problem is documented independently: Liu et al. (2026), in a study of 31,132 agent skills, report that 26.1% contain security vulnerabilities. Our own full-catalog census is published as a citable open dataset.
Sources & who's responsible: