# io.github.CloudCorpRecords/greenlight (npm · @reneturcios/greenlight)

Pre-flight checks for open-source contributions: is this GitHub issue actually landable?

- Trust score: 59/100 (low)
- Registry status: active
- Liveness: live
- Owner verified: no
- Last scored: 2026-10-17

## Components

- npm · `@reneturcios/greenlight`: 59/100 (this document), [markdown](https://verifymcp.io/servers/cloudcorprecords-greenlight/reneturcios-greenlight.md), [page](https://verifymcp.io/servers/cloudcorprecords-greenlight/reneturcios-greenlight)

## Channel facts

- Registry: `npm`
- Package: `@reneturcios/greenlight`
- Version: `0.6.0`
- Transport: `stdio`

## Trust breakdown

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. Scores are 0–100 per category. Scoring method: https://verifymcp.io/docs/scoring (what has changed: https://verifymcp.io/docs/scoring/changelog)

Scored 2026-10-17.

- **Supply Chain Security**: 63/100
  - No malware found by supply-chain analysis.
  - Known CVEs could not be checked: the version this server declares is not published in its registry.
  - No install/post-install scripts declared.
  - Dependency health could not be checked: the version this server declares is not published in its registry.
- **Provenance & Transparency**: 45/100
  - Source repository is publicly reachable at the declared URL.
  - Provenance check failed: no build-provenance attestation is published.
  - Clear OSI-approved license (MIT).
  - Actively maintained (last published 0 days ago).
  - Disclosure check failed: no security disclosure policy was found in the source repository.
- **Schema Quality & AI Usability**: 72/100
  - AI-judged instruction clarity (excellent).
  - Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 2243 tokens (~149/item across 15 items; 15 tools + 0 resources), over budget; trim descriptions and params.
  - Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples.
- **Stability & Change Management**: 3/100
  - Stability observed for 1 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.
- **Tool Coverage**: 100/100
  - 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).
  - 100% of tool parameters carry a description.
- **Tool Safety**: 100/100
  - No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.
  - We read all 15 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.
  - An AI judge read all 15 captured unit(s) of tool text and found none that tries to manipulate the model reading it.
- **Capabilities**: 100/100
  - Implements a supported MCP spec version (2025-11-25); the latest is 2026-07-28.

## Install

### How do I install the io.github.CloudCorpRecords/greenlight MCP server?

io.github.CloudCorpRecords/greenlight runs locally as an npm package, launched with npx -y @reneturcios/greenlight. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.

### Claude

```bash
claude mcp add cloudcorprecords-greenlight -- npx -y @reneturcios/greenlight
```

### Cursor

```json
{
  "mcpServers": {
    "cloudcorprecords-greenlight": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@reneturcios/greenlight"
      ]
    }
  }
}
```

### VS Code

```json
{
  "servers": {
    "cloudcorprecords-greenlight": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@reneturcios/greenlight"
      ]
    }
  }
}
```

### Codex

```bash
codex mcp add cloudcorprecords-greenlight -- npx -y @reneturcios/greenlight
```

### opencode

```json
{
  "$schema": "https://opencode.ai/config.json",
  "mcp": {
    "cloudcorprecords-greenlight": {
      "type": "local",
      "command": [
        "npx",
        "-y",
        "@reneturcios/greenlight"
      ],
      "enabled": true
    }
  }
}
```

### OpenClaw

```bash
openclaw mcp add cloudcorprecords-greenlight --command npx --arg -y --arg @reneturcios/greenlight
```

### Hermes

```yaml
mcp_servers:
  cloudcorprecords-greenlight:
    command: "npx"
    args: ["-y", "@reneturcios/greenlight"]
```

### Netclaw

```json
{
  "McpServers": {
    "cloudcorprecords-greenlight": {
      "Transport": "stdio",
      "Command": "npx",
      "Arguments": [
        "-y",
        "@reneturcios/greenlight"
      ]
    }
  }
}
```

### Vellum

```bash
assistant mcp add cloudcorprecords-greenlight -t stdio -c npx -a -y @reneturcios/greenlight
```

### Other

```json
{
  "mcpServers": {
    "cloudcorprecords-greenlight": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@reneturcios/greenlight"
      ]
    }
  }
}
```

## Changelog

Every change recorded for this component, newest first. Days that predate change tracking, or that we cannot explain, say so: "we were watching and nothing happened" and "we were not watching" are different claims.

### 2026-10-17 (score 59, −11)

- [security regression] Stability: 0.00 → unverified
- [security regression] Known CVEs: pass → unverified
- [security regression] Tool safety: pass → unverified
- [functional regression] Schema quality: 1886 → 2243
- [functional regression] Capabilities: pass → unverified
- [functional regression] Dependency health: 0.85 → unverified
- [functional regression] Tool coverage: 100 → unverified
- [functional] First check of Schema quality: unverified
- [functional] Package version: 0.5.0 → 0.6.0

### 2026-10-16 (score 70)

First indexed and scored.

## MCP tools (15)

### `check_issue` (~88 tokens)

Verdict on whether a GitHub issue is actually landable for an outside contributor. Returns GO, RISKY, TAKEN, GATED, or STALE with reasons, claim signals, and detected repo gates. Call this before writing code for an issue.

Input parameters:

- `issue_url` (string, required): Full GitHub issue URL, e.g. https://github.com/owner/repo/issues/123

### `scan_repo` (~96 tokens)

Rank a repo's open issues by verdict, GO first. Starts with label-tagged good-first-issue / help-wanted issues; when the repo does not use those labels, falls back to the most recent open unassigned issues (flagged as fallback). Use this to pick a winnable issue instead of a taken one.

Input parameters:

- `repo` (string, required): owner/repo, e.g. PrefectHQ/fastmcp

### `repo_friction` (~60 tokens)

Friction score 0-100 for a repo (100 = easiest to land an outside PR). Based on detected contribution gates and computed outcome signals.

Input parameters:

- `repo` (string, required): owner/repo, e.g. PrefectHQ/fastmcp

### `claim_issue` (~180 tokens)

Post a claim comment on a GitHub issue, shaped by the repo's contribution gates. Runs the verdict pipeline first and refuses on TAKEN/STALE verdicts or vouch-gated repos. DRY RUN BY DEFAULT: returns the comment plan without posting unless execute is true, and posting requires GITHUB_TOKEN.

Input parameters:

- `eta_days` (number): ETA in days recorded in the protocol claim comment (eta-days: line).
- `execute` (boolean): Post the comment for real. Defaults to false: dry run returns the plan only.
- `force` (boolean): Claim even on a TAKEN or STALE verdict.
- `issue_url` (string, required): Full GitHub issue URL, e.g. https://github.com/owner/repo/issues/123
- `plan` (string): Plan recorded in the protocol claim comment (plan: line).

### `prep_issue` (~166 tokens)

Prepare to work an issue: check/create your fork and a branch named from the issue title (learning the repo's branch convention from recent PRs when detectable), and write a local PREP.md checklist (verdict, gates, DCO reminders, next commands). Never clones. DRY RUN BY DEFAULT: no fork or branch is created unless execute is true; creating them requires GITHUB_TOKEN.

Input parameters:

- `dir` (string): Directory for PREP.md. Defaults to ./greenlight-prep/<repo>-<number>/
- `execute` (boolean): Actually create the fork/branch. Defaults to false: dry run returns the plan only.
- `issue_url` (string, required): Full GitHub issue URL, e.g. https://github.com/owner/repo/issues/123

### `open_pr` (~189 tokens)

Open a pull request for an issue from your fork branch. Verifies the branch exists, is ahead of upstream, and (on DCO repos) that every commit carries a Signed-off-by line. Composes the PR title and body (Closes #N plus verdict and gates at open time). DRY RUN BY DEFAULT: returns the composed PR without opening it unless execute is true; opening requires GITHUB_TOKEN.

Input parameters:

- `branch` (string, required): Fork branch to open the PR from, e.g. feat/resume-61
- `execute` (boolean): Open the PR for real. Defaults to false: dry run returns the plan only.
- `issue_url` (string, required): Full GitHub issue URL, e.g. https://github.com/owner/repo/issues/123
- `title` (string): PR title override. Defaults to the branch's latest commit subject or the issue title.

### `ci_triage` (~123 tokens)

Answer the red-PR question: is this failure mine or pre-existing? Fetches the failing check runs on the PR head, compares them against the base branch's recent check history, and classifies each failing check as pre-existing, likely-yours, indeterminate (with a stated lean), or external-blocker (deploy/auth failures like Vercel). Call this on any PR with failing CI before spending time debugging.

Input parameters:

- `pr_url` (string, required): Full GitHub PR URL, e.g. https://github.com/owner/repo/pull/123

### `review_triage` (~127 tokens)

Triage the review feedback on your PR: which comments actually need you? Gathers bot (CodeRabbit, cubic, Greptile, Copilot) and human review comments, classifies each finding as likely-real, likely-noise, or needs-decision with the reason stated, and drafts a reply for each. Human reviewer comments are never called noise. Drafts only; nothing is posted. Call this after pushing and getting review feedback.

Input parameters:

- `pr_url` (string, required): Full GitHub PR URL, e.g. https://github.com/owner/repo/pull/123

### `guard_pr` (~147 tokens)

Maintainer-side analysis of an incoming pull request: competing fix (other open PRs already fixing the same issue), prior claims by someone other than the PR author, missing required artifacts (changeset file, DCO sign-off, CLA status), and whether the author is a first-time contributor. Returns markdown ready to post as one PR comment plus structured findings. Reads a .greenlight-guard.json in the working directory for per-repo check toggles. Never posts anything. Call this from a GitHub Action or before reviewing an incoming PR.

Input parameters:

- `pr_url` (string, required): Full GitHub PR URL, e.g. https://github.com/owner/repo/pull/123

### `repo_digest` (~176 tokens)

Repo-level maintainer report: what needs attention across the whole repo? Reports PR races (two or more open PRs fixing the same issue, with first-claim arbitration), claimed-by-other conflicts (an open PR whose linked issue was claimed by someone else first), stale claims (issues claimed 14+ days ago with no open PR), and assignment-gate conflicts (repos that require assignment before a PR). Pass a --limit to bound the API budget on large repos; sections that cannot be computed say so instead of showing empty. Call this when triaging a repo, not just one PR.

Input parameters:

- `limit` (number): Max open PRs and open issues to inspect. The summary always states the cap and the true totals.
- `repo` (string, required): owner/repo, e.g. ComposioHQ/composio

### `claim_status` (~133 tokens)

The Claim Protocol pre-flight answer for one issue: who holds it, until when, who is queued, which PRs compete, which gates bite, and whether the repo honors the protocol at all. Returns the SPEC 5.1 status payload with competing PRs and gates merged from the check machinery. The verdict vocabulary matches check_issue (GO / RISKY / TAKEN / GATED / STALE); a null verdict means no protocol claims and the check_issue verdict stands.

Input parameters:

- `issue_url` (string, required): Full GitHub issue URL, e.g. https://github.com/owner/repo/issues/123

### `preflight` (~109 tokens)

The one-call answer to 'can I work on this issue right now': the Claim Protocol issue status (claim holder, expiry, queue, competing PRs, gates) plus the repo friction summary (how hard this repo is to land a PR in, 0-100). Call this before committing to any issue; it combines claim_status and repo_friction.

Input parameters:

- `issue_url` (string, required): Full GitHub issue URL, e.g. https://github.com/owner/repo/issues/123

### `verify_comment` (~292 tokens)

Draft the verified-finding comment for a maintainer-only repo (modelcontextprotocol/inspector, modelcontextprotocol/servers): outside PRs are closed on sight there, so the contribution that lands is a detailed, verified issue comment. Assembles the comment from your notes: claim, environment, reproduction steps, observed vs expected, root cause, fix sketch, and a verification footer. Sections you leave empty render as explicit gaps, never plausible filler. DRAFT ONLY: nothing is posted, ever. Copy the markdown into the issue thread yourself.

Input parameters:

- `claim` (string): One-line claim of the problem.
- `environment` (string): Environment: repo, ref/commit, date, platform.
- `expected` (string): What should have happened instead.
- `fix` (string): Proposed fix sketch, not a code dump.
- `issue_url` (string, required): Full GitHub issue URL, e.g. https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/inspector/issues/2723
- `observed` (string): What was observed when the repro ran.
- `ran` (string): What was actually run (commands, counts).
- `reproduction` (string): Reproduction steps, one per line, exact commands.
- `root_cause` (string): Root cause with file paths and line refs when known; empty renders 'not yet isolated'.
- `verified_by` (string): Who ran the verification.

### `babysit_prs` (~212 tokens)

Watch your open PRs and get the one prioritized action list: needs you now (new review findings, CI failing on your code, merge conflicts, new guard flags, stuck checks), waiting on them (checks running, green with no feedback yet), quiet. Compares against stored watermarks so reruns report only what changed since the last check. Cron-friendly: always succeeds unless the input is wrong.

Input parameters:

- `author` (string): Author whose open PRs to discover with mine.
- `mine` (boolean): Discover the author's open PRs across the repos list via the GitHub search API.
- `pr_urls` (array): Full GitHub PR URLs to watch, e.g. ["https://github.com/owner/repo/pull/123"]. Empty when using mine.
- `repos` (array): owner/repo list for mine discovery, e.g. ["acme/widgets"].
- `state_path` (string): Watermark file. Defaults to ~/.greenlight/babysit.json.

### `evidence_pack` (~145 tokens)

The Verified PR evidence pack for one pull request: the guard verdict, CI triage, review triage, and Claim Protocol status of the linked issues, in one markdown document where every claim cites its source (check run, review anchor, claim comment URL). Call this when a maintainer, a recruiter, or your future self needs proof, not a summary.

Input parameters:

- `pr_url` (string, required): Full GitHub PR URL, e.g. https://github.com/owner/repo/pull/123
- `verify_json` (string): Path to a prior `greenlight verify --json` report to include the honest red-green test delta. The pack never runs suites itself.

## Diagnostics

Captured diagnostic sections: Provenance. The full working is on the page: https://verifymcp.io/servers/cloudcorprecords-greenlight/reneturcios-greenlight#diagnostics

## Score history

- 2026-10-17: 59
- 2026-10-16: 70

## Common questions

### What is the io.github.CloudCorpRecords/greenlight MCP server?

io.github.CloudCorpRecords/greenlight is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.CloudCorpRecords/greenlight. Pre-flight checks for open-source contributions: is this GitHub issue actually landable? This page covers its npm package (@reneturcios/greenlight).

### Is the io.github.CloudCorpRecords/greenlight MCP server safe to use?

io.github.CloudCorpRecords/greenlight scores 59 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. It declares no install or post-install scripts. 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.CloudCorpRecords/greenlight MCP server expose?

io.github.CloudCorpRecords/greenlight exposes 15 tools: check_issue, scan_repo, repo_friction, claim_issue, prep_issue, and 10 more. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 2,243 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.

### Is the io.github.CloudCorpRecords/greenlight MCP server still maintained?

io.github.CloudCorpRecords/greenlight is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 17 October 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.CloudCorpRecords/greenlight MCP server under?

io.github.CloudCorpRecords/greenlight declares the MIT licence, which is OSI-approved. That covers the source only, and says nothing about the cost of any service it calls.

## Links

- npm package: https://www.npmjs.com/package/@reneturcios/greenlight
- Socket report: https://socket.dev/npm/package/@reneturcios/greenlight
- Repository: https://github.com/CloudCorpRecords/greenlight
- Changelog RSS feed: https://verifymcp.io/servers/cloudcorprecords-greenlight/reneturcios-greenlight.xml
- Changelog JSON feed: https://verifymcp.io/servers/cloudcorprecords-greenlight/reneturcios-greenlight.json
- HTML version of this page: https://verifymcp.io/servers/cloudcorprecords-greenlight/reneturcios-greenlight