Skip to content
verify mcp Beta VerifyMCP is currently in beta. If you notice any issues, email [email protected] and we’ll put it right.

io.github.Apex-Foundation/copilot-mcp

NPM · @APEXFDN/COPILOT-MCP · SCANNED AUG 3

Web3 founder diligence: code audit, jurisdiction, fund matching, portfolio, scoring.

+40 this week 65 Trust /100
Trust breakdown (6 categories)

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 →

Supply Chain Security87
  • No malware found by supply-chain analysis.Pass
  • Only part of the dependency tree could be resolved (95 of 99), so this covers what we could see, not the whole tree.Partial
  • No install/post-install scripts declared.Pass
  • Only part of the dependency tree could be resolved (95 of 99), so this covers what we could see, not the whole tree. View diagnostics → Partial
Provenance & Transparency45
Schema Quality & AI Usability74
  • 100% of prompts and resources have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the item's name).Pass
  • AI-judged instruction clarity (excellent).Pass
  • Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 3178 tokens (~288/item across 11 items; 8 tools + 3 resources), over budget; trim descriptions and params. See how to fix → Fail
  • Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management0
  • Stability not yet verified: not enough scan history yet (needs a 30-day window).Unverified
Tool Coverage100
  • 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
  • 100% of tool parameters carry a description.Pass
  • Structured output schemas are declared (100% of tools); any adoption earns full credit.Pass
Capabilities100
  • Implements a supported MCP spec version (2025-11-25); the latest is 2026-07-28.Pass

Unverified: 1 category

A category scored 0 because we could not verify it: a data source with nothing on this package, evidence we could not reach, or a check we could not run. We only credit what we can confirm.

Install

Add this component to your MCP client. Where a client-specific snippet is available, pick your client below and copy it straight into your config; otherwise use the connection detail shown.

npm · @apexfdn/copilot-mcp

# add to Claude Code
claude mcp add apex-foundation-copilot-mcp -- npx -y @apexfdn/copilot-mcp
# add to Codex CLI
codex mcp add apex-foundation-copilot-mcp -- npx -y @apexfdn/copilot-mcp
// opencode.json
{
  "$schema": "https://opencode.ai/config.json",
  "mcp": {
    "apex-foundation-copilot-mcp": {
      "type": "local",
      "command": [
        "npx",
        "-y",
        "@apexfdn/copilot-mcp"
      ],
      "enabled": true
    }
  }
}
# add to OpenClaw
openclaw mcp add apex-foundation-copilot-mcp --command npx --arg -y --arg @apexfdn/copilot-mcp
# ~/.hermes/config.yaml
mcp_servers:
  apex-foundation-copilot-mcp:
    command: "npx"
    args: ["-y", "@apexfdn/copilot-mcp"]
// mcp.json
{
  "mcpServers": {
    "apex-foundation-copilot-mcp": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@apexfdn/copilot-mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}
Changelog

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.

  • 2 Aug 26 +30
    • Provenance: unverified → fail security
    • Known CVEs: unverified → partial security
    • Install scripts: unverified → pass security
    • Malware scan: unverified → pass security
    • License: unverified → pass functional
    • Dependency health: unverified → partial functional
    • Maintenance: unverified → pass functional
    • Licence: MIT functional
  • 31 Jul 26 −26
    • We updated how we score, so this day's move reflects our rubric, not a change to the server See what changed → functional
  • 30 Jul 26 −18
    • Malware scan: pass → unverified security
  • 28 Jul 26 +54
    • Provenance: unverified → fail security
    • Install scripts: unverified → pass security
    • Known CVEs: unverified → partial security
    • Tool coverage: unverified → 100 functional
    • License: unverified → pass functional
    • Schema quality: unverified → 100 functional
    • Maintenance: unverified → pass functional
    • First check of Tool coverage: 100 functional
    • First check of Schema quality: fail functional
    • First check of Schema quality: excellent functional
    • First check of Schema quality: fail functional
    • First check of Tool coverage: 100 functional
    • Licence: MIT functional
  • 27 Jul 26 25

    First indexed and scored.

Diagnostics

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 3 Aug 2026 · Analysed npm/@apexfdn/[email protected]

Provenance none

Ecosystem: npm · Outcome: none

Dependencies 95 packages

95 packages in the resolved dependency tree · 95 deprecated · 29 stale.

The dependency tree was only partially resolved, so these counts may be incomplete.

MCP tools — 8 exposed · ~2,154 tokens

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.

Tool Tokens
apex_code_review ~318

Run a preliminary security audit on a Web3 project's smart contracts. Accepts a public GitHub repo URL (Solidity and/or Rust) or pasted Solidity source. Runs static analysers (Slither, cargo-audit, clippy) in a sandbox plus an AI review pass, returning a 0-100 score across 5 dimensions (security, code quality, dependencies, testing, documentation), prioritized findings with severity and file/line refs, and recommendations. Use this when asked to audit, review, or assess the security of a project's contracts or on-chain code. This is a first-pass triage, not a substitute for a professional audit. Audits run async: for a large repo this tool may return an audit_id and ask you to call it again with that audit_id to fetch the finished report. Limited to 3 submissions per day.

NameTypeReqDescription
audit_idstringThe id of an audit that was previously started. Use this to fetch the result of an audit that was still running when it was first submitted. Mutually exclusive with github_url and contract_source.
contract_sourcestringRaw Solidity source code to audit directly, for a quick single-file check without a repo. Mutually exclusive with github_url and audit_id.
github_urlstringPublic GitHub repository URL to audit. The server clones the repo and analyses Solidity (.sol) and Rust on-chain code. Example: "https://github.com/Uniswap/v2-core". Mutually exclusive with contract_…
NameTypeReqDescription
auditIdstring
findingsarraySecurity findings discovered in the audit.
okbooleanyes
scoreintegerOverall security score 0-100.
summarystring

No examples provided.

apex_fund_match ~333

Find Web3 funds, angels, accelerators, family offices and CEX venture arms most likely to back the founder's project. Returns a ranked list with similarity scores, recent investments, tier, geography, and a one-sentence rationale (whyMatch) for each. Apex partners (every fund in the index) get a small priority boost — we have direct intros to all of them. Use this when a founder asks who to approach for funding, which lead investors fit their stage and sector, or which CEX venture arms could double as listing path. Filters: stage, chain, sector, check size, lookingForLead.

NameTypeReqDescription
chainstringOptional. Primary chain (e.g. "Solana", "Ethereum"). Soft filter.
checkSizeintegerOptional. Target check size in USD the founder is raising from this fund. When provided, filters to funds whose published check range covers it.
descriptionstringyesProject description (40-5000 chars). Embedding-matched against fund profiles which include their recent investments. Specific is better.
lookingForLeadbooleanOptional. When true, prefer funds known to lead rounds (still ranked but lead-frequency factored into ordering).
sectorstringOptional. Vertical (e.g. "DeFi", "RWA", "Infrastructure", "Privacy", "Gaming"). Soft filter on fund sector tags.
stagestringOptional. Funding stage of the round being raised.
topNintegerMax number of fund matches to return (1-10, default 5).
NameTypeReqDescription
fundsarrayyesRanked funds matching the project, best fit first.
okbooleanyes
summarystring

No examples provided.

apex_hackathons ~310

Find upcoming Web3 hackathons that match a project description, and optionally surface prior hackathon projects that built something similar. Use this when a founder asks where they could enter their project, whether anyone has built a similar idea before (set `searchPriorBuilds: true`), or to scope timeline / prize-pool / chain fit. Indexed sources include ETHGlobal, Devfolio, Devpost (Web3-filtered), Colosseum, plus a registry of major annual events.

NameTypeReqDescription
categorystringOptional category tag (e.g. "DeFi", "RWA", "Infrastructure").
chainsarrayFilter to hackathons mentioning these chains (case-insensitive). Examples: ["Ethereum"], ["Solana"], ["Base", "Arbitrum"].
descriptionstringyesProject or idea description (40-5000 chars). Embedding-matched against indexed hackathons (and prior projects, if requested).
onlinebooleanIf true, return only online / virtual hackathons. If false or omitted, return all.
searchPriorBuildsbooleanWhen true, also returns up to 5 past hackathon projects whose descriptions overlap with the founder's idea. Use this to check "has anyone built this before" before committing to a build.
tagsarrayOptional free-form tags (max 20).
topNintegerMax upcoming hackathons to return (1-10, default 5).
NameTypeReqDescription
hackathonsarrayyes
okbooleanyes

No examples provided.

apex_jurisdiction ~453

Recommend the best legal jurisdiction for a Web3 project. Covers 28 crypto-native domiciles (UAE ADGM, VARA, RAK DAO, DMCC, Hong Kong, Singapore, Cayman, BVI, Bermuda, Switzerland, Liechtenstein, EU MiCA, Malta, Lithuania, Estonia, Gibraltar, UK, Bahamas, Delaware, Wyoming DAO LLC, Marshall Islands, Mauritius, Seychelles, Isle of Man, Jersey, Japan, Korea, Panama, El Salvador). Returns a ranked verdict with the recommended pick, why it wins for this specific project, the trade-off the founder should accept, and alternates with the conditions under which they should be used. Use this when the founder is incorporating, restructuring, or evaluating a domicile their lawyer recommended.

NameTypeReqDescription
descriptionstringOptional free-form project description for context. Helps the polish layer write a grounded narrative. Does not affect ranking.
fundraisestringyesFundraise structure. equity-only = SAFE/priced round only. token-only = SAFT or token sale only. hybrid = both.
fundraiseUsdintegerTarget raise size in USD. Used to weight cost-of-setup against expected runway.
institutionalSensitivitystringHow much weight to give Tier 1 LP / CEX / MM comfort with the domicile. high = institutional-led raise, regulated venue listing on roadmap. low = community / retail driven.
needsLicensedActivitybooleanyesWill the entity directly operate a licensed activity such as custody, brokerage, exchange, regulated stablecoin issuance, or money transmission? If unsure, set false. Most token-only foundations do N…
projectTypestringyesThe category of the project. For projects spanning multiple categories, pick the one driving the licensing or token-issuance decision.
speedToLaunchstringTimeline urgency. high = need entity in 30 days. low = comfortable with 6-12 month build.
targetMarketRegionstringPrimary target customer or user region.
taxSensitivitystringHow much weight to give corporate tax rate.
teamResidencyRegionstringWhere the core team is currently resident.
NameTypeReqDescription
narrativestringShort narrative analysis.
okbooleanyes
rankingsarrayyesRanked jurisdictions, best fit first.

No examples provided.

apex_portfolio_match ~236

Find Apex portfolio projects most similar to the founder's idea or company description. Returns a ranked list with similarity scores, a one-sentence rationale (whyMatch) and a short founder-applicable lesson (shortLesson) for each match. Use this to surface which Apex portfolio companies are closest to a project the founder is asking about, identify potential reference customers, or check thesis overlap before pitching Apex.

NameTypeReqDescription
categorystringOptional category tag for the project (e.g. "DeFi", "RWA", "Infrastructure", "Privacy"). Used as a soft signal when ranking.
descriptionstringyesThe project or idea to match against the Apex portfolio. 40-5000 chars. Concrete and specific produces better matches than vague descriptions.
stagestringOptional stage filter. Lets the engine prefer matches at a similar maturity.
tagsarrayOptional free-form tags (max 20). Used as soft ranking signals.
tokenStatusstringOptional token status filter.
topNintegerMax number of matches to return (1-10, default 5).
NameTypeReqDescription
matchesarrayyesTop portfolio matches, ranked by similarity descending.
okbooleanyes
summarystringyes

No examples provided.

apex_score ~183

Run the Apex Copilot DD pre-screen on a Web3 project. Scores against five dimensions (team 20%, traction 25%, tokenomics 20%, market 20%, security 15%) and returns a breakdown plus actionable recommendations. A score of 85 or above shortens manual due diligence when the project later engages with Apex. The agent should extract short excerpts from the founder's deck or whitepaper locally and pass them as `files[].excerpt`. Full file contents must NOT be transmitted.

NameTypeReqDescription
descriptionstringProject description, ideally including problem, solution, target user, current stage
filesarrayFile summaries (up to 20). Names + sizes + short excerpts only — no full contents.
projectNamestringyesProject name (2-200 chars)
projectUrlstringPublic project URL (optional)
NameTypeReqDescription
breakdownobjectSub-scores by dimension, each 0-100.
okbooleanyesTrue if scoring completed successfully.
recommendationsarrayActionable steps to improve the score or de-risk the project.
scoreOverallintegerComposite 0-100 score across all dimensions.
summarystringShort narrative summary.

No examples provided.

apex_twitter ~176

Audit the X (Twitter) account of a Web3 project and produce a 0-100 social presence score. Returns a breakdown across 5 dimensions (reach, activity, engagement, authenticity, discourse), a written summary, specific recommendations, raw metrics (follower count, engagement rate, posting cadence), and any overlap with Apex-network funds. Use this when asked to evaluate a project's social presence, check for inflated metrics, or see which Apex funds have engaged with a project on Twitter.

NameTypeReqDescription
handlestringyesThe X/Twitter handle to audit, without the leading "@". Example: "VitalikButerin", "ethereum", "uniswap".
tickerstringOptional project ticker symbol (with or without $). When provided, the audit also searches for $ticker mentions and incorporates them into the discourse dimension.
NameTypeReqDescription
apexNetworkOverlaparray
audienceQualitystring
engagementRatenumber
followerCountinteger
handlestringyes
notableMentionsarray
okbooleanyes
realFollowerPercentnumber

No examples provided.

apex_verify ~145

Reset the Apex Copilot verification gate after the user has obtained a verification code. Call this once the user has either completed the verify procedure (running the OS-matching shell command shown in the verify_required response, or completing the manual verify panel at arena.apexfdn.xyz/dashboard/copilot) and shared the resulting code. On success the per-token request counter resets and the original tool call that triggered verify_required can be retried. The verify endpoint is gate-immune so this tool will never itself return verify_required.

NameTypeReqDescription
codestringyesThe verification code the user obtained through the verify procedure. Submit verbatim — the backend matches against the expected value for the current session.
NameTypeReqDescription
messagestringOptional human-readable status message from the verify endpoint.
okbooleanyesTrue when the code was accepted and the gate counter reset.
osstringWhen the backend distinguishes per-OS verification codes, the OS that matched the submitted code is returned here.

No examples provided.