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

Moltline Code Review

REMOTE · MCP.MOLTLINESTUDIO.COM · SCANNED SEP 21

Risk-scan a diff, flag AI-generated-code tells, find secrets. 5 of 7 tools need no account.

+1 this week 87 Trust /100
Trust breakdown (7 categories)

How this component scores in each security and reliability category. Every signal is checked automatically against the live server, and we only credit what we can confirm. How we score → Why this is hard to score →

Endpoint Security83
Transport & Reachability100
Schema Quality & AI Usability68
  • AI-judged instruction clarity (excellent).Pass
  • Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 1702 tokens (~243/item across 7 items; 7 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 Management100
  • No destabilizing schema changes in the last 30 days.Pass
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
Tool Safety100
  • No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
  • We read all 7 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
  • An AI judge read all 8 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
Install

How do I install the Moltline Code Review MCP server?

Moltline Code Review is a hosted endpoint at https://mcp.moltlinestudio.com/codereview, so there is nothing to install locally. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.

remote · mcp.moltlinestudio.com

# add to Claude Code
claude mcp add --transport http com-moltlinestudio-codereview 'https://mcp.moltlinestudio.com/codereview'
// .cursor/mcp.json
{
  "mcpServers": {
    "com-moltlinestudio-codereview": {
      "url": "https://mcp.moltlinestudio.com/codereview"
    }
  }
}
// .vscode/mcp.json
{
  "servers": {
    "com-moltlinestudio-codereview": {
      "type": "http",
      "url": "https://mcp.moltlinestudio.com/codereview"
    }
  }
}
# ~/.codex/config.toml
[mcp_servers.com-moltlinestudio-codereview]
url = "https://mcp.moltlinestudio.com/codereview"
// opencode.json
{
  "$schema": "https://opencode.ai/config.json",
  "mcp": {
    "com-moltlinestudio-codereview": {
      "type": "remote",
      "url": "https://mcp.moltlinestudio.com/codereview",
      "enabled": true
    }
  }
}
# add to OpenClaw
openclaw mcp add com-moltlinestudio-codereview --url 'https://mcp.moltlinestudio.com/codereview' --transport streamable-http
# ~/.hermes/config.yaml
mcp_servers:
  com-moltlinestudio-codereview:
    url: "https://mcp.moltlinestudio.com/codereview"
// ~/.netclaw/config/netclaw.json
{
  "McpServers": {
    "com-moltlinestudio-codereview": {
      "Transport": "http",
      "Url": "https://mcp.moltlinestudio.com/codereview"
    }
  }
}
# add to Vellum
assistant mcp add com-moltlinestudio-codereview -t streamable-http -u 'https://mcp.moltlinestudio.com/codereview'
// mcp.json
{
  "mcpServers": {
    "com-moltlinestudio-codereview": {
      "type": "http",
      "url": "https://mcp.moltlinestudio.com/codereview"
    }
  }
}

The mcpServers block is a cross-client convention. Remote transports vary, so check your client's docs.

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.

  • 16 Sept 26 0
    • Stability: 0.97 → pass security
  • 15 Sept 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.

  • 12 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.

  • 10 Sept 26 +1

    No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 77 to 80. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 23 days of observed history at the previous scan, 24 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.

  • 8 Sept 26 +1

    No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 70 to 73. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 21 days of observed history at the previous scan, 22 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.

  • 6 Sept 26 +1

    No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 63 to 67. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 19 days of observed history at the previous scan, 20 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.

  • 4 Sept 26 +1

    No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 57 to 60. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 17 days of observed history at the previous scan, 18 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.

  • 2 Sept 26 +1

    No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 50 to 53. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 15 days of observed history at the previous scan, 16 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.

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 21 Sept 2026 · Probed https://mcp.moltlinestudio.com/codereview

TLS valid

Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .

Subject Issuer Valid from Valid until Key Signature Serial
CN=moltlinestudio.com CN=WE1,O=Google Trust Services,C=US 15 Aug 2026 13 Nov 2026 ECDSA 256 ECDSA-SHA256 72e09c6114448e7a0ed370fb03c277cb
SANs: moltlinestudio.com, *.moltlinestudio.com
CN=WE1,O=Google Trust Services,C=US (CA) CN=GTS Root R4,O=Google Trust Services LLC,C=US 13 Dec 2023 20 Feb 2029 ECDSA 256 ECDSA-SHA384 7ff31977972c224a76155d13b6d685e3
CN=GTS Root R4,O=Google Trust Services LLC,C=US (CA) CN=GlobalSign Root CA,OU=Root CA,O=GlobalSign nv-sa,C=BE 15 Nov 2023 28 Jan 2028 ECDSA 384 SHA256-RSA 7fe530bf331343bedd821610493d8a1b

Background: What to check on a remote MCP endpoint →

DNSSEC secure

Validation of mcp.moltlinestudio.com. Secure

Zone DS Keys Algorithms Outcome
. trust_anchor 20326, 38696 8, 8 Verified
com. present 19718 13 Verified
moltlinestudio.com. present 2371 13 Verified
mcp.moltlinestudio.com. Verified address RRset verified with the apex keys
Authentication No authorisation required

The endpoint answered without asking for a token. Anyone who knows the URL can reach it.

Result No authorisation required
HTTP status 200
Header Value
strict-transport-security max-age=15576000; includeSubDomains
content-security-policy default-src 'self'; script-src 'self' 'unsafe-inline'; style-src 'self' 'unsafe-inline'; img-src 'self' data:; font-src 'self' data:; connect-src 'self' https://api.moltlinestudio.com https://mcp.moltlinestudio.com; form-action 'self'; frame-ancestors 'none'; base-uri 'self'; object-src 'none'; upgrade-insecure-requests
x-content-type-options nosniff
x-frame-options DENY
referrer-policy strict-origin-when-cross-origin
permissions-policy camera=(), microphone=(), geolocation=()

Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →

Transports 2 probes
Transport URL Outcome Status Location
streamable-http https://mcp.moltlinestudio.com/codereview Verified 200
http (plaintext) http://mcp.moltlinestudio.com/codereview HTTPS enforced 301 https://mcp.moltlinestudio.com/codereview
MCP tools · 7 exposed · ~1,614 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. 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 →

Tool Tokens
ai_code_smell_scan ~246

Flag the tells of unreviewed AI-generated code in a source file. FREE. Detects comments that restate the next line, leaked assistant preambles, placeholder TODOs, shipped 'Example usage' blocks, over-broad try/except that swallows errors, and auto-named identifiers. Typical input {"code": "<file contents>"} returns {"reviewed_confidence": 0-100, "hits": [{"smell": "...", "evidence": "<quoted snippet>"}], "reading": "...", "note": "..."}. Use on a full source file suspected of unreviewed machine authorship. Not on a diff (review_diff), and the result is a signal to check, not proof of authorship. Errors: on invalid, missing, or malformed input this tool never raises a protocol error — it returns {"error": "<what is wrong and how to fix it>"}. Every call is read-only and idempotent, so after correcting the input it is always safe to retry.

NameTypeReqDescription
codestringyesFull source text to scan, any language; paste the file contents as a single string.

Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.

No examples provided.

complexity_report ~253

Report structural complexity of a source file, function by function. FREE. Measures per-function length, max nesting depth, and a cyclomatic-style branch count (if/for/while/case/&&/||/except), flagging functions too long or too deeply nested to review confidently. Typical input {"code": "<file contents>"} returns {"functions": N, "detail": [{"name": ..., "start": N, "lines": N, "branches": N, "max_depth": N}], "flags": ["..."], "note": "..."}. Use when structure rather than correctness is the question. Not for vulnerabilities (security_deep_dive). Errors: on invalid, missing, or malformed input this tool never raises a protocol error — it returns {"error": "<what is wrong and how to fix it>"}. Every call is read-only and idempotent, so after correcting the input it is always safe to retry.

NameTypeReqDescription
codestringyesFull source text to analyze, pasted as a single string.
languagestringOptional language hint, e.g. "python" or "javascript"; "auto" (default) detects from syntax.

Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.

No examples provided.

get_reviewer_persona ~170

Load the Senior Reviewer persona for consistent, high-signal reviews. PREMIUM (license). The persona is a reviewing voice that is skeptical, specific, and kind — demands evidence over vibes and blocks only on real risk. Takes no arguments. Returns {"persona": ..., "identity": ..., "rules": ["...", ...], "opening_move": "..."} ready to adopt as a system prompt. Use to keep repeated reviews consistent in voice and rigor. Not for running a review - the scan tools do that. Errors: on invalid, missing, or malformed input this tool never raises a protocol error — it returns {"error": "<what is wrong and how to fix it>"}. Every call is read-only and idempotent, so after correcting the input it is always safe to retry.

Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.

Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.

No examples provided.

review_checklist ~202

Produce a focused pull-request review checklist for a language or stack. FREE. Covers the things that actually break in production, with extra items per language. Typical input {"language": "python"} returns {"language": "python", "checklist": ["...", ...], "note": "..."}. Use before a review, to decide what to look for. Not for reviewing actual code - pass code to review_diff or security_deep_dive. Errors: on invalid, missing, or malformed input this tool never raises a protocol error — it returns {"error": "<what is wrong and how to fix it>"}. Every call is read-only and idempotent, so after correcting the input it is always safe to retry.

NameTypeReqDescription
languagestringLanguage or stack to tailor for: "python", "javascript", "typescript", "go", "sql", or "general" (default). Unknown values fall back to the general checklist.

Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.

No examples provided.

review_diff ~275

Risk-scan a unified diff the way a senior reviewer triages a PR. FREE. Flags added lines matching known risk patterns — injection sinks, disabled TLS, bare excepts, debug prints, TODOs, N+1 hints, leaked secrets — with the new-file line number and a severity (1 low - 4 high). Typical input {"diff": "<git diff output>"} returns {"added_lines": N, "risk_score": 0-100, "verdict": "...", "secrets": [...], "findings": [{"line": N, "severity": 1-4, "issue": "...", "code": "..."}], "note": "..."}. Use on a unified diff, when only the change matters. Not for whole-file analysis (complexity_report, ai_code_smell_scan). Errors: on invalid, missing, or malformed input this tool never raises a protocol error — it returns {"error": "<what is wrong and how to fix it>"}. Every call is read-only and idempotent, so after correcting the input it is always safe to retry.

NameTypeReqDescription
diffstringyesA unified diff exactly as produced by `git diff` — text with @@ hunk headers and +/- line prefixes. Only added (+) lines are scanned.

Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.

No examples provided.

secret_scan ~231

Scan text for accidentally-committed machine credentials and private-key material. FREE. Reports each match's location and category so it can be rotated before it leaks. Detection is pattern-based over the common leaked-credential formats; it never echoes the matched value back. Typical input {"text": "<file, diff, or config contents>"} returns {"leaked": bool, "count": N, "findings": [{"line": N, "type": "<category>"}], "note": "..."}. Pattern matching only - a clean result is not proof, and every hit needs human confirmation before anyone acts on it. Not a general security review (security_deep_dive). Errors: on invalid, missing, or malformed input this tool never raises a protocol error — it returns {"error": "<what is wrong and how to fix it>"}. Every call is read-only and idempotent, so after correcting the input it is always safe to retry.

NameTypeReqDescription
textstringyesThe file, diff, or config contents to scan, pasted as a single string.

Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.

No examples provided.

security_deep_dive ~237

Run an OWASP-oriented security pass over a source file. PREMIUM (license). Checks injection sinks, auth/session handling, crypto misuse, SSRF/deserialization, and unsafe file/path handling — each finding cites the line, the OWASP risk class, and a concrete fix direction. Typical input {"code": "<file contents>"} returns {"issues": N, "findings": [{"line": N, "class": "A03 Injection", "fix": "...", "code": "..."}], "owasp_note": "..."}. Use on one source file when vulnerabilities are the question. Not for style or structure (complexity_report), and never a substitute for a security professional on high-risk code. Errors: on invalid, missing, or malformed input this tool never raises a protocol error — it returns {"error": "<what is wrong and how to fix it>"}. Every call is read-only and idempotent, so after correcting the input it is always safe to retry.

NameTypeReqDescription
codestringyesFull source text to audit, pasted as a single string; any common language.

Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.

No examples provided.

Common questions

What is the Moltline Code Review MCP server?

Moltline Code Review is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as com.moltlinestudio/codereview. Risk-scan a diff, flag AI-generated-code tells, find secrets. 5 of 7 tools need no account. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://mcp.moltlinestudio.com/codereview).

Is the Moltline Code Review MCP server safe to use?

Moltline Code Review scores 87 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 Moltline Code Review MCP server expose?

Moltline Code Review exposes 7 tools: review_diff, ai_code_smell_scan, complexity_report, secret_scan, review_checklist, and 2 more. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 1,614 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.

Does the Moltline Code Review MCP server require authentication?

No. We connected to Moltline Code Review without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.

Is the Moltline Code Review MCP server still maintained?

Moltline Code Review is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 21 September 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.