io.github.Atharva-Jayappa/blast-scope
PYPI · BLAST-SCOPE · SCANNED SEP 20
Contextual blast-radius scoring for shell commands an AI agent is about to run
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 Security55
- Malware check failed: a supply-chain vendor flagged a high-severity malware risk. See how to fix → Fail
- No known CVEs affecting this package version or its production dependencies.Pass
- Runs hatchling.build at install time, a recognised native-build step with no shell scripting around it. View diagnostics → Pass
- 0 of 34 dependencies flagged as unhealthy. View diagnostics → Pass
Provenance & Transparency32
- 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
- License check failed: no license is declared. See how to fix → Fail
- Actively maintained (last published 42 days ago).Pass
- Disclosure check failed: no security disclosure policy was found in the source repository. See how to fix → Fail
Schema Quality & AI Usability64
- AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
- Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 591 tokens (~147/item across 4 items; 4 tools + 0 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 Management97
- Stability observed for 29 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
Tool Coverage67
- 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
Tool Safety100
- No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
- We read all 4 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 4 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.Atharva-Jayappa/blast-scope MCP server?
io.github.Atharva-Jayappa/blast-scope runs locally as a PyPI package, launched with uvx blast-scope. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.
pypi · blast-scope
claude mcp add atharva-jayappa-blast-scope -- uvx blast-scope
{
"mcpServers": {
"atharva-jayappa-blast-scope": {
"command": "uvx",
"args": [
"blast-scope"
]
}
}
} {
"servers": {
"atharva-jayappa-blast-scope": {
"command": "uvx",
"args": [
"blast-scope"
]
}
}
} codex mcp add atharva-jayappa-blast-scope -- uvx blast-scope
{
"$schema": "https://opencode.ai/config.json",
"mcp": {
"atharva-jayappa-blast-scope": {
"type": "local",
"command": [
"uvx",
"blast-scope"
],
"enabled": true
}
}
} openclaw mcp add atharva-jayappa-blast-scope --command uvx --arg blast-scope
mcp_servers:
atharva-jayappa-blast-scope:
command: "uvx"
args: ["blast-scope"] {
"McpServers": {
"atharva-jayappa-blast-scope": {
"Transport": "stdio",
"Command": "uvx",
"Arguments": [
"blast-scope"
]
}
}
} assistant mcp add atharva-jayappa-blast-scope -t stdio -c uvx -a blast-scope
{
"mcpServers": {
"atharva-jayappa-blast-scope": {
"command": "uvx",
"args": [
"blast-scope"
]
}
}
} 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.
- 19 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 90 to 93. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 27 days of observed history at the previous scan, 28 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 17 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 83 to 87. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 25 days of observed history at the previous scan, 26 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 16 Sept 26 0
- Package version: 0.6.0 → 0.6.1 functional
- 15 Sept 26 −3
- Stability: pass → 0.80 functional
- 14 Sept 26 +1
- Stability: 0.97 → pass security
- 12 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 90 to 93. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 27 days of observed history at the previous scan, 28 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 10 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 83 to 87. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 25 days of observed history at the previous scan, 26 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 8 Sept 26 −3
- Stability: pass → 0.80 functional
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 pypi/blast-scope@0.6.1
Provenance No attestation
The registry publishes no build provenance for this version, so there is nothing to verify.
| Result | No attestation |
|---|---|
| Ecosystem | pypi |
Background: How many MCP packages publish verified provenance →
Install scripts 1 script
| Hook | Tier | Command |
|---|---|---|
| build_backend | allowlisted | hatchling.build |
Background: Why install scripts are a supply-chain risk →
Dependencies 34 packages
| Packages resolved | 34 |
|---|---|
| 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 →
assess_command ~237
Assess the blast radius of a shell command. Splits chained commands on ``&&``, ``||``, ``;``, and ``|``, then parses, resolves, and scores each segment independently. The top-level fields surface the worst step's score and recommendation; the ``chain`` field contains every step's individual breakdown. When ``project_root`` is provided and no graph database exists yet, the graph is built automatically on the first call. Use ``index_project`` to force a rebuild. Args: command: Raw shell command string to analyze. cwd: Working directory for resolving relative paths. Defaults to the server's current working directory. project_root: Root directory of the project for graph-based scoring. If provided, the graph is auto-built when missing. Returns: Structured risk assessment with worst-step score, severity, recommendation, and per-step chain breakdown. Example:: assess_command("cd /tmp && rm -rf .", cwd="/home/user", project_root="/project")
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| command | string | yes | – |
| cwd | – | – | – |
| project_root | – | – | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
index_project ~102
Build or refresh the dependency graph for a project. Forces a graph rebuild for the given project root. Normally not required — ``assess_command`` auto-builds the graph on first use — but useful to refresh after a large code change. Args: project_root: Absolute path to the project root directory. Returns: Status dict confirming the project was indexed. Example:: index_project("/home/user/my-project")
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| project_root | string | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
list_snapshots ~112
List undo snapshots captured before risky commands, newest first. Snapshots are taken automatically by the PreToolUse hook before a medium-or-higher risk command and stored under ``<project_root>/.blast-scope/snapshots``. Args: project_root: The project root the snapshots were taken under. Returns: ``{"snapshots": [{id, created, reason, paths}, ...]}``. Example:: list_snapshots("/home/user/my-project")
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| project_root | string | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
restore_snapshot ~140
Undo a risky command by restoring a snapshot's files in place. Overwrites whatever currently exists at each snapshotted path with the archived copy. Use ``list_snapshots`` to find the id. Args: snapshot_id: The snapshot id to restore. project_root: The project root the snapshot was taken under. Returns: ``{"status": "restored", "paths": [...]}`` or an ``error`` entry. Example:: restore_snapshot("20260530T101500-a1b2c3", "/home/user/my-project")
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| project_root | string | yes | – |
| snapshot_id | string | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
What is the io.github.Atharva-Jayappa/blast-scope MCP server?
io.github.Atharva-Jayappa/blast-scope is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.Atharva-Jayappa/blast-scope. Contextual blast-radius scoring for shell commands an AI agent is about to run. This page covers its PyPI package (blast-scope).
Is the io.github.Atharva-Jayappa/blast-scope MCP server safe to use?
io.github.Atharva-Jayappa/blast-scope scores 63 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. A supply-chain scanner flagged a possible malware risk on one channel of this server. We found no known CVEs affecting it as of 20 September 2026. 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.Atharva-Jayappa/blast-scope MCP server expose?
io.github.Atharva-Jayappa/blast-scope exposes 4 tools: assess_command, index_project, list_snapshots, restore_snapshot. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 591 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Is the io.github.Atharva-Jayappa/blast-scope MCP server still maintained?
io.github.Atharva-Jayappa/blast-scope 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.