ResiMind
MCPB · RESIMIND-0.16.0.MCPB
Exact polynomial checks, sparse expansion and verified rule memory. Local MCP tools, no model key.
Available components
Last scanned (23 hours ago)
Scores higher than 77% of MCPB servers
Category Developer Tools
How this component scores in each security and reliability category. Every signal is checked automatically from public evidence about the published package, including repeated runs of it in an isolated sandbox, and we only credit what we can confirm. How we score → Why this is hard to score →
Supply Chain Security12
- No malware scan is available for this kind of package: the supply-chain vendors we use do not cover it. This is a permanent gap in our coverage, not a finding about the package.Unverified
- Known CVEs were checked across the 27 of 27 dependencies we could resolve, so this covers what we could see, not the whole tree.Partial
- Install-script risk not yet assessed.Unverified
- 1 of 27 dependencies flagged as unhealthy. View diagnostics → Partial
Provenance & Transparency48
- Source repository is publicly reachable at the declared URL. View diagnostics → Pass
- Provenance check failed: no build-provenance attestation is published. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
- Clear OSI-approved license (MIT).Pass
- Actively maintained (last published 20 days ago).Pass
- Publishes a security disclosure policy (SECURITY.md).Pass
Schema Quality & AI Usability55
- AI-judged instruction clarity (fair).Partial
- Tool/resource definitions use about 248 tokens (~49/item across 5 items; 5 tools + 0 resources), lean.Pass
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management60
- Stability observed for 18 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
Tool Coverage71
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 0% of tool parameters carry a description.Fail
- Structured output schemas are declared (100% of tools); any adoption earns full credit.Pass
Tool Safety100
- No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
- We read all 5 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 6 captured unit(s) of tool text and found none that tries to manipulate the model reading it.Pass
Capabilities100
- Implements a current MCP spec version (2026-07-28).Pass
Every change we have recorded for this component, newest first. Security-relevant changes are always shown. ▲ marks a change for the better, ▼ a change for the worse; unmarked changes are neutral.
- 3 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 53 to 57. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 16 days of observed history at the previous scan, 17 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 1 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 47 to 50. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 14 days of observed history at the previous scan, 15 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 31 Oct 26 +1
- Provenance: unverified → fail ▼ security
- Security disclosure: unverified → pass ▲ functional
- 30 Oct 26 0
- Provenance: fail → unverified ▼ security
- Security disclosure: pass → unverified ▼ functional
- 28 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 33 to 37. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 10 days of observed history at the previous scan, 11 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 25 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 23 to 27. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 7 days of observed history at the previous scan, 8 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 23 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 17 to 20. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 5 days of observed history at the previous scan, 6 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 21 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 10 to 13. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 3 days of observed history at the previous scan, 4 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
Diagnostic detail from the automated scan of this channel: what the scanner observed at each step, so you can see exactly where a check passed or failed. It is informational only and never changes the trust score.
Captured 4 Nov 2026 · Analysed mcpb/https://github.com/1105216375-alt/resimind/releases/download/v0.16.0/resimind-0.16.0.mcpb
Provenance No attestation
The registry publishes no build provenance for this version, so there is nothing to verify.
| Result | No attestation |
|---|---|
| Ecosystem | mcpb |
| Reason | No attestation published |
Background: How many MCP packages publish verified provenance →
Dependencies 27 packages
| Packages resolved | 27 |
|---|---|
| No linked repository | 1 |
| Tree resolution | Complete |
Background: SBOMs and build attestations, explained →
The tools this component advertises to a client, with an estimated token cost for each. Expand a tool to see its parameters and schema. The per-tool counts are indicative and are not scored directly; the schema's total context footprint is one signal in Schema Quality & AI Usability. A tool's description is untrusted text the model reads on every call, which is what makes this list a security surface and not just an inventory: how tool poisoning works →
expand_polynomial ~38
Expand a bounded rational polynomial into independently checked sparse terms without calling a model.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| expression | string | yes | – |
| variables | array | yes | – |
Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.
No examples provided.
learn_polynomial ~43
Solve an expansion and explicitly update process-local rule memory; compatible examples may yield a universally checked schema.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| expression | string | yes | – |
| variables | array | yes | – |
Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.
No examples provided.
list_rules ~26
List process-local verified rule statements and fingerprints; listing is not proof of any new task.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.
No examples provided.
recall_polynomial ~44
Try only verified rules in process-local memory, rechecking the application; no fallback computation or model call.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| expression | string | yes | – |
| variables | array | yes | – |
Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.
No examples provided.
verify_identity ~48
Check whether two bounded rational polynomials are identically equal; return a coefficient mismatch when false.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| lhs | string | yes | – |
| rhs | string | yes | – |
| variables | array | yes | – |
Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.
No examples provided.
How do I install the ResiMind MCP server?
ResiMind ships as an MCPB bundle, a single file you download and open in an MCP host that supports MCPB bundles, such as Claude Desktop. The host reads the launch command from the bundle's own manifest, so there is no command to copy. Before opening it, check the file's SHA-256 matches the one the MCP registry declares for it, 5270994576b4a12467ce826cd7d678d4865c700df856e9b955b66f771979814d; the commands to do that are on this page. If it does not match, do not open it.
mcpb · resimind-0.16.0.mcpb
Download bundleCheck the download matches the SHA-256 the MCP registry declares before you open it. If it does not match, do not open the file.
SHA-256
5270994576b4a12467ce826cd7d678d4865c700df856e9b955b66f771979814d
macOS / Linux
echo "5270994576b4a12467ce826cd7d678d4865c700df856e9b955b66f771979814d resimind-0.16.0.mcpb" | shasum -a 256 -c
Windows (PowerShell)
(Get-FileHash -Algorithm SHA256 .\resimind-0.16.0.mcpb).Hash -eq "5270994576b4a12467ce826cd7d678d4865c700df856e9b955b66f771979814d"
Run it in the folder you saved the bundle to, then open the file with an MCPB-capable host such as Claude Desktop.
What is the ResiMind MCP server?
ResiMind is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.1105216375-alt/resimind. Exact polynomial checks, sparse expansion and verified rule memory. Local MCP tools, no model key. This page covers its MCPB bundle (https://github.com/1105216375-alt/resimind/releases/download/v0.16.0/resimind-0.16.0.mcpb).
Is the ResiMind MCP server safe to use?
ResiMind scores 47 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. That is a record of what we were able to check automatically, not an endorsement. The category breakdown on this page shows every signal behind the number, including the ones we could not confirm.
What tools does the ResiMind MCP server expose?
ResiMind exposes 5 tools: verify_identity, expand_polynomial, learn_polynomial, recall_polynomial, list_rules. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 199 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
What licence is the ResiMind MCP server under?
ResiMind declares the MIT licence, which is OSI-approved. That covers the source only, and says nothing about the cost of any service it calls.