io.github.abhinavteja123/codemore
NPM · CODEMORE · SCANNED SEP 20
The static analyzer your AI agent reads — fix-ready, machine-readable scan reports over MCP.
Available components
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 Security74
- No malware found by supply-chain analysis.Pass
- CVE check failed: a known high-severity CVE affects uuid 9.0.1, a direct dependency. A fixed version is available. View diagnostics → Fail
- Runs a script at install time (postinstall) that we could not recognise. It may be perfectly ordinary, but we do not read the published tarball, so we cannot say what it does. View diagnostics → Partial
- 60 of 199 dependencies flagged as unhealthy (2 deprecated). View diagnostics → Partial
Provenance & Transparency100
- Source repository is publicly reachable at the declared URL. View diagnostics → Pass
- Cryptographically verified build provenance (signed, bound to abhinavteja123/codemore). View diagnostics → Pass
- Clear OSI-approved license (MIT).Pass
- Actively maintained (last published 63 days ago).Pass
- Publishes a security disclosure policy (SECURITY.md).Pass
Schema Quality & AI Usability80
- AI-judged instruction clarity (excellent).Pass
- Tool/resource definitions use about 662 tokens (~110/item across 6 items; 6 tools + 0 resources), lean.Pass
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management83
- Stability observed for 25 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
Tool Coverage96
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 87% of tool parameters carry a description.Partial
Tool Safety100
- No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
- We read all 6 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 supported MCP spec version (2025-11-25); the latest is 2026-07-28.Pass
How do I install the io.github.abhinavteja123/codemore MCP server?
io.github.abhinavteja123/codemore runs locally as an npm package, launched with npx -y codemore. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.
npm · codemore
claude mcp add abhinavteja123-codemore -- npx -y codemore
{
"mcpServers": {
"abhinavteja123-codemore": {
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"-y",
"codemore"
]
}
}
} {
"servers": {
"abhinavteja123-codemore": {
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"-y",
"codemore"
]
}
}
} codex mcp add abhinavteja123-codemore -- npx -y codemore
{
"$schema": "https://opencode.ai/config.json",
"mcp": {
"abhinavteja123-codemore": {
"type": "local",
"command": [
"npx",
"-y",
"codemore"
],
"enabled": true
}
}
} openclaw mcp add abhinavteja123-codemore --command npx --arg -y --arg codemore
mcp_servers:
abhinavteja123-codemore:
command: "npx"
args: ["-y", "codemore"] {
"McpServers": {
"abhinavteja123-codemore": {
"Transport": "stdio",
"Command": "npx",
"Arguments": [
"-y",
"codemore"
]
}
}
} assistant mcp add abhinavteja123-codemore -t stdio -c npx -a -y codemore
{
"mcpServers": {
"abhinavteja123-codemore": {
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"-y",
"codemore"
]
}
}
} 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.
- 20 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 80 to 83. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 24 days of observed history at the previous scan, 25 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 19 Sept 26 −3
- Stability: pass → 0.80 functional
- 18 Sept 26 0
- Stability: 0.97 → pass security
- 17 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 93 to 97. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 28 days of observed history at the previous scan, 29 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 15 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 87 to 90. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 26 days of observed history at the previous scan, 27 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 13 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 80 to 83. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 24 days of observed history at the previous scan, 25 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 12 Sept 26 −3
- Stability: pass → 0.80 functional
- 11 Sept 26 0
- Stability: 0.97 → pass security
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 20 Sept 2026 · Analysed npm/codemore@0.2.8
Provenance Verified
A signed build attestation was found and verified, binding this exact artifact to the source repository it claims to come from.
| Result | Verified |
|---|---|
| Ecosystem | npm |
| Reason | Verified |
| Discovered via | Registry attestation endpoint |
| Source repo | abhinavteja123/codemore |
| Certificate issuer | https://token.actions.githubusercontent.com |
| Certificate SAN | https://github.com/abhinavteja123/codemore/.github/workflows/release.yml@refs/tags/v0.2.8 |
| Rekor log index | 2143286249 |
| Predicate type | https://slsa.dev/provenance/v1 |
| Subject digest | sha512:698a6f0189620417bbd7104d026c147c2b8d92bc214cb61e8e993accd8e1aa6f5239f82a74710c5b5e90b1a4a77fc21901d1efefd7d43fe39673b2d5a |
Background: How many MCP packages publish verified provenance →
Install scripts 1 script
| Hook | Tier | Command |
|---|---|---|
| postinstall | unreviewed | node scripts/download-binaries.js --skip-download |
Background: Why install scripts are a supply-chain risk →
Vulnerabilities 1 finding
| ID | CVE | Severity | Vector | Fix available |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GHSA-w5hq-g745-h8pq | CVE-2026-41907 | high | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N | yes |
Background: What a vulnerability scan can and cannot prove →
Dependencies 199 packages
| Packages resolved | 199 |
|---|---|
| Deprecated | 2 |
| Stale | 58 |
| 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 →
apply_fix ~85
For a previously discovered issue (by instanceId), returns the prompt + verification criteria you should use to produce a fix. After you generate proposed file content, call validate_fix to confirm before writing to disk. Repeat up to 3 attempts if validate_fix reports FAIL, feeding the validator diagnostic back into your next attempt.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| instanceId | string | yes | instanceId from a previous scan. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
explain_issue ~48
Return the full rationale + citation + suggested fix template for a previously discovered issue by instanceId.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| instanceId | string | yes | The instanceId field from a previous scan_project / scan_file result. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
scan_file ~121
Scan a single file by passing its content inline. Useful when the agent has the file in memory and wants to re-check after an edit without writing to disk first.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| content | string | yes | Full file content as text. |
| enableExperimental | boolean | – | – |
| filePath | string | yes | Logical file path (used for relative-path output and rule routing). |
| language | string | – | Override the inferred language (one of: typescript, javascript, sql, env, json, yaml, markdown, shell, python). |
| packs | array | – | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
scan_project ~183
Scan a project directory and return a CodeMoreReport. Use this first to find issues, then call suggest_fix(instanceId) per issue. Each fix should be validated by re-running scan_project on the touched file.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| enableExperimental | boolean | – | Include rules in lifecycle=experimental. Default false (matches the CLI) — set to true if you want noisier coverage. As of v0.2.1 the calibrated catalog is beta-tier; experimental contains rules pend… |
| frameworks | array | – | Framework hints attached to every file context (e.g. ["supabase","next.js"]). |
| packs | array | – | Limit to specific packs (e.g. ["vibe-supabase"]). Default: all registered packs. |
| rootPath | string | yes | Absolute or workspace-relative path to the project root. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
suggest_fix ~56
Return only the suggestedFix block for an issue. Lighter than explain_issue when the agent already has the report and just needs the patch instructions + verification criteria.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| instanceId | string | yes | The instanceId field from a previous scan. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
validate_fix ~169
After you propose a fix, call this with the issue's instanceId and the proposed new file content. The harness re-runs the same rules in-memory on the new content and returns pass/fail. Use this as the stop signal for your fix-then-verify loop: if passed=true, apply the patch on disk; if passed=false, feed the diagnostic back into your planner and retry.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| includeOtherRules | boolean | – | Also report findings from rules other than the targeted one. Useful for "did my fix introduce a new issue?" checks. Default false. |
| instanceId | string | yes | The instanceId field from a previous scan_project / scan_file result. |
| newContent | string | yes | The proposed new full content of the file. Replacement-only — no unified diffs yet. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
What is the io.github.abhinavteja123/codemore MCP server?
io.github.abhinavteja123/codemore is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.abhinavteja123/codemore. The static analyzer your AI agent reads, fix-ready, machine-readable scan reports over MCP. This page covers its npm package (codemore).
Is the io.github.abhinavteja123/codemore MCP server safe to use?
io.github.abhinavteja123/codemore scores 86 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. We recorded 1 known advisory against it as of 20 September 2026. Its build provenance is signed and verified. 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 io.github.abhinavteja123/codemore MCP server expose?
io.github.abhinavteja123/codemore exposes 6 tools: scan_project, scan_file, explain_issue, suggest_fix, validate_fix, apply_fix. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 662 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Is the io.github.abhinavteja123/codemore MCP server still maintained?
io.github.abhinavteja123/codemore is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 20 September 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.
What licence is the io.github.abhinavteja123/codemore MCP server under?
io.github.abhinavteja123/codemore declares the MIT licence, which is OSI-approved. That covers the source only, and says nothing about the cost of any service it calls.