io.github.CloudCorpRecords/issueport
OCI · GHCR.IO/CLOUDCORPRECORDS/ISSUEPORT · 2 COMPONENTS
Linear teams, projects, issues and comments via GraphQL, as MCP tools.
Available components
Last scanned (11 hours ago)
Scores higher than 46% of OCI servers
Category Project Management
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 Security0
- No malware scan is available for this kind of package: the supply-chain vendors we use do not cover it. This is a permanent gap in our coverage, not a finding about the package.Unverified
- Known CVEs could not be checked: this artifact ships no SBOM or dependency manifest, so there is no dependency list to read.Unverified
- Install-script risk not yet assessed.Unverified
- Dependency health could not be checked: this artifact ships no SBOM or dependency manifest, so there is no dependency list to read.Unverified
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 (MIT).Pass
- Actively maintained (last published 3 days ago).Pass
- Disclosure check failed: no security disclosure policy was found in the source repository. See how to fix → Fail
Schema Quality & AI Usability70
- AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
- Tool/resource definitions use about 604 tokens (~50/item across 12 items; 12 tools + 0 resources), lean.Pass
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management13
- Stability observed for 4 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
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
Tool Safety100
- No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
- We read all 12 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 12 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
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.
Checks we ran (12)
- Source repository
- Provenance
- License
- Maintenance
- Security disclosure
- Schema quality
- Stability
- Tool coverage
- Injection markers
- Destructive annotations
- Judged manipulation
- MCP protocol
Checks we could not complete (4)
These are gaps on our side, not findings about this package. We only credit what we can confirm, so a category made up entirely of them scores 0.
- Malware scan in Supply Chain Security (scores 0 for this)No malware scan is available for this kind of package: the supply-chain vendors we use do not cover it. This is a permanent gap in our coverage, not a finding about the package.
- Known CVEs in Supply Chain Security (scores 0 for this)Known CVEs could not be checked: this artifact ships no SBOM or dependency manifest, so there is no dependency list to read.
- Install scripts in Supply Chain Security (scores 0 for this)Install-script risk not yet assessed.
- Dependency health in Supply Chain Security (scores 0 for this)Dependency health could not be checked: this artifact ships no SBOM or dependency manifest, so there is no dependency list to read.
Does not apply to this package (2)
- Endpoint SecurityScored on hosted endpoints only. A package has no live endpoint of its own for us to probe.
- Transport & ReachabilityScored on hosted endpoints only. A package has no live endpoint of its own for us to probe.
The score does not measure everything. What the score does not measure →
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.
- 3 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 3 to 7. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 1 days of observed history at the previous scan, 2 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 1 Nov 26 40
First indexed and scored.
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 oci/ghcr.io/cloudcorprecords/issueport@0.1.0
Provenance No attestation
The registry publishes no build provenance for this version, so there is nothing to verify.
| Result | No attestation |
|---|---|
| Ecosystem | oci |
| Reason | No attestation published |
Background: How many MCP packages publish verified provenance →
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 →
archive_issue ~28
Archive a Linear issue.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| issue_id | string | yes | Id of the Linear issue to archive. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
create_comment ~46
Add a comment to a Linear issue.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| body | string | yes | Text body of the comment. |
| issue_id | string | yes | Id of the Linear issue to add the comment to. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
create_issue ~115
Create a new Linear issue in a team.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| assignee_id | string | – | Id of the user to assign the new issue to. |
| description | string | – | Description text of the new issue. |
| label_ids | array | – | Ids of the labels to attach to the new issue. |
| priority | number | – | Priority of the new issue, as a number. |
| team_id | string | yes | Id of the Linear team in which to create the issue. |
| title | string | yes | Title of the new issue. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
create_project ~64
Create a new Linear project for one or more teams.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| description | string | – | Description text of the new project. |
| name | string | yes | Name of the new project. |
| team_ids | array | yes | Ids of the Linear teams to associate with the new project. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_issue ~31
Get a Linear issue by its id.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| issue_id | string | yes | Id of the Linear issue to retrieve. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_team ~31
Get a Linear team by its id.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| team_id | string | yes | Id of the Linear team to retrieve. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
list_comments ~32
List comments on a Linear issue.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| issue_id | string | yes | Id of the Linear issue whose comments are listed. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
list_issues ~67
List Linear issues, optionally within one team.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | number | – | Maximum number of issues to return; defaults to 50 when omitted. |
| team_id | string | – | Id of the Linear team to restrict the listed issues to; when omitted, issues from all teams are listed. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
list_projects ~12
List Linear projects.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
list_teams ~13
List Linear teams.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
search_issues ~57
Search Linear issues by title text.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | number | – | Maximum number of matching issues to return; defaults to 50 when omitted. |
| query | string | yes | Text to match, case-insensitively, against issue titles. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
update_issue ~108
Update fields of an existing Linear issue.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| assignee_id | string | – | Id of the user to assign the issue to. |
| description | string | – | New description text for the issue. |
| issue_id | string | yes | Id of the Linear issue to update. |
| priority | number | – | New priority of the issue, as a number. |
| state_id | string | – | Id of the workflow state to move the issue to. |
| title | string | – | New title for the issue. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the io.github.CloudCorpRecords/issueport MCP server?
io.github.CloudCorpRecords/issueport runs locally as a container image, launched with docker run --rm -i ghcr.io/cloudcorprecords/issueport:0.1.0 mcp. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 3 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.
oci · ghcr.io/cloudcorprecords/issueport
claude mcp add cloudcorprecords-issueport -- docker run --rm -i ghcr.io/cloudcorprecords/issueport:0.1.0 mcp
What is the io.github.CloudCorpRecords/issueport MCP server?
io.github.CloudCorpRecords/issueport is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.CloudCorpRecords/issueport. Linear teams, projects, issues and comments via GraphQL, as MCP tools. This page covers its container image (ghcr.io/cloudcorprecords/issueport).
Is the io.github.CloudCorpRecords/issueport MCP server safe to use?
io.github.CloudCorpRecords/issueport scores 41 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. 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/issueport MCP server expose?
io.github.CloudCorpRecords/issueport exposes 12 tools: list_issues, get_issue, create_issue, update_issue, search_issues, and 7 more. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 604 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Is the io.github.CloudCorpRecords/issueport MCP server still maintained?
io.github.CloudCorpRecords/issueport 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 io.github.CloudCorpRecords/issueport MCP server under?
io.github.CloudCorpRecords/issueport declares the MIT licence, which is OSI-approved. That covers the source only, and says nothing about the cost of any service it calls.
What did VerifyMCP test on the io.github.CloudCorpRecords/issueport MCP server?
VerifyMCP ran 12 checks on io.github.CloudCorpRecords/issueport, covering Source repository, Provenance, License, Maintenance and 8 more. 4 items could not be completed, a gap on our side rather than a finding about io.github.CloudCorpRecords/issueport: Malware scan, Known CVEs, Install scripts and Dependency health. One category scores 0 for that reason, because we only credit what we can confirm. Endpoint Security and Transport & Reachability do not apply to a container image, so they were not tested. The score does not measure everything, and the scoring documentation lists what it leaves out.