CEDRUS
PYPI · CEDRUS-MCP
Reasoning scaffolding that supercharges your small AI: an argument-mapping MCP server
Available components
Last scanned (3 hours ago)
Scores higher than 85% of PyPI 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 Security100
- No malware found by supply-chain analysis.Pass
- No known CVEs affecting this package version or its production dependencies.Pass
- Runs hatchling.build at install time, a recognised build step with no custom scripting around it. View diagnostics → Pass
- 1 of 29 dependencies flagged as unhealthy. View diagnostics → Partial
Provenance & Transparency45
- 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 (AGPL-3.0-or-later).Pass
- Actively maintained (last published 47 days ago).Pass
- Disclosure check failed: no security disclosure policy was found in the source repository. See how to fix → Fail
Schema Quality & AI Usability89
- 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
- Tool/resource definitions use about 1071 tokens (~107/item across 10 items; 8 tools + 2 resources), lean.Pass
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management100
- No destabilizing schema changes in the last 30 days.Pass
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 Safety75
- No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
- 0 of 2 tool(s) whose name or description implies an irreversible operation declare an MCP destructiveHint annotation; "unlink" implies "unlink" and declares no destructiveHint at all, which the MCP spec reads as destructive by default. See how to fix → Fail
- An AI judge read all 10 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.
- 5 Nov 26 +15
- Malware scan: unverified → pass ▲ security
- 4 Nov 26 −15
- Malware scan: pass → unverified ▼ security
- 1 Nov 26 0
- Stability: 0.97 → pass security
- 31 Oct 26 0
- Stability: pass → 0.97 functional
- 25 Oct 26 0
- Stability: 0.97 → pass security
- 24 Oct 26 0
- Stability: pass → 0.97 functional
- 18 Oct 26 0
- Stability: 0.97 → pass security
- 17 Oct 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.
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 5 Nov 2026 · Analysed pypi/cedrus-mcp@2.0.1
Provenance No attestation
The registry publishes no build provenance for this version, so there is nothing to verify.
| Result | No attestation |
|---|---|
| Ecosystem | pypi |
| Reason | No attestation published |
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 29 packages
| Packages resolved | 29 |
|---|---|
| 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 →
add_argument ~216
Add a new argument that responds to a claim or argument already in the map. Args: target: The ID the argument responds to, e.g. "C1" or "A7". relation: How it responds to the target. One of: "supports" - the argument gives a reason for the target; "attacks" - the argument gives a reason against the target; "undercuts" - the argument says the target's reasons do not lead to its conclusion, without denying that those reasons are true. The target of an undercut must be an argument, not a claim. label: A short title of a few words, e.g. "Tax revenue". text: The argument written out in full. Returns: The new ID (A1, A2, …) and the state of the map.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| label | string | yes | – |
| relation | string | yes | – |
| target | string | yes | – |
| text | string | yes | – |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | string | yes | – |
No examples provided.
add_claim ~134
Add a claim: the statement being debated, or a general principle arguments rely on. Add a claim first; arguments need something to respond to. A claim that responds to nothing is a root claim. To make a claim support or attack something, use link afterwards. Args: label: A short title of a few words, e.g. "Legalisation of soft drugs". text: The claim written out as one statement. Returns: The new ID (C1, C2, …) and the state of the map.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| label | string | yes | – |
| text | string | yes | – |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | string | yes | – |
No examples provided.
delete ~107
Delete a claim or an argument, together with its relations. The ID is never given to a new item. If some arguments respond only to this one, the deletion is refused and they are named, because they would be left with nothing to respond to. Args: id: The ID to delete, e.g. "A7". with_replies: Set to true to delete those arguments as well.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | string | yes | – |
| with_replies | boolean | – | – |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | string | yes | – |
No examples provided.
edit ~101
Change the label and/or the text of a claim or an argument. The ID and every relation stay as they are. Args: id: The ID to change, e.g. "A7". label: A new short title. Leave empty to keep the current one. text: A new full text. Leave empty to keep the current one.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | string | yes | – |
| label | string | – | – |
| text | string | – | – |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | string | yes | – |
No examples provided.
link ~123
Relate two claims or arguments that are already in the map. Use this when one argument responds to more than one thing, or when a claim supports or attacks something. If the two are already related, this changes the relation to the new type. Args: source: The ID that does the supporting, attacking or undercutting. relation: "supports", "attacks" or "undercuts". target: The ID being responded to.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| relation | string | yes | – |
| source | string | yes | – |
| target | string | yes | – |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | string | yes | – |
No examples provided.
new_map ~62
Start a new, empty argument map, e.g. to map a different issue. Only call this when you are done with the current map: it is cleared. IDs start again at C1 and A1, so IDs from the old map no longer apply.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | string | yes | – |
No examples provided.
show ~52
Show the whole argument map: its claims, its arguments and all relations. Call this whenever you need to see the current map. Its output replaces any earlier show output, so you only ever need the latest one.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | string | yes | – |
No examples provided.
unlink ~99
Remove the relation that goes from source to target. An argument must keep at least one target, so its last relation cannot be removed. A claim may lose all of its relations. To move an argument, link it to its new target first and unlink the old one afterwards. Args: source: The ID the relation starts at. target: The ID the relation points to.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| source | string | yes | – |
| target | string | yes | – |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | string | yes | – |
No examples provided.
How do I install the CEDRUS MCP server?
CEDRUS runs locally as a PyPI package, launched with uvx cedrus-mcp. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.
pypi · cedrus-mcp
claude mcp add cedrus-mcp-cedrus-mcp -- uvx cedrus-mcp
What is the CEDRUS MCP server?
CEDRUS is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.cedrus-mcp/cedrus-mcp. Reasoning scaffolding that supercharges your small AI: an argument-mapping MCP server. This page covers its PyPI package (cedrus-mcp).
Is the CEDRUS MCP server safe to use?
CEDRUS scores 83 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. We found no known CVEs affecting it as of 5 November 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 CEDRUS MCP server expose?
CEDRUS exposes 8 tools: show, add_claim, add_argument, link, unlink, and 3 more. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 894 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Is the CEDRUS MCP server still maintained?
CEDRUS is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 5 November 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 CEDRUS MCP server under?
CEDRUS declares the AGPL-3.0-or-later licence, which is OSI-approved. That covers the source only, and says nothing about the cost of any service it calls.