UpToCode
PYPI · UPTOCODE · 2 COMPONENTS
Evidence-backed architecture-quality analysis for Python agent applications.
Available components
Last scanned (12 hours ago)
Scores higher than 93% of PyPI servers
Category Testing and QA
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 Security82
- No malware found by supply-chain analysis.Pass
- CVE check failed: a known high-severity CVE affects mcp 1.28.1, a direct dependency. A fixed version is available. View diagnostics → Fail
- Runs hatchling.build at install time, a recognised build step with no custom scripting around it. View diagnostics → Pass
- 5 of 44 dependencies flagged as unhealthy. View diagnostics → Partial
Provenance & Transparency100
- Source repository is publicly reachable at the declared URL. View diagnostics → Pass
- Cryptographically verified build provenance (signed, bound to DDYRich72/UpToCode). View diagnostics → Pass
- Clear OSI-approved license (MIT).Pass
- Actively maintained (last published 107 days ago).Pass
- Publishes a security disclosure policy (SECURITY.md).Pass
Schema Quality & AI Usability82
- 100% of prompts and resources have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the item's name).Pass
- AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
- Tool/resource definitions use about 590 tokens (~53/item across 11 items; 10 tools + 1 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 Coverage83
- 70% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Partial
- 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 10 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
Checks we ran (16)
- Malware scan
- Known CVEs
- Install scripts
- Dependency health
- Source repository
- Provenance
- License
- Maintenance
- Security disclosure
- Schema quality
- Stability
- Tool coverage
- Injection markers
- Destructive annotations
- Judged manipulation
- MCP protocol
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 +15
- Malware scan: unverified → pass ▲ security
- 2 Nov 26 −15
- Malware scan: pass → unverified ▼ security
- 1 Nov 26 +15
- Malware scan: unverified → pass ▲ security
- 31 Oct 26 −15
- Malware scan: pass → unverified ▼ security
- Stability: 0.97 → pass security
- 30 Oct 26 0
- Stability: pass → 0.97 functional
- 29 Oct 26 +15
- Malware scan: unverified → pass ▲ security
- 28 Oct 26 0
- CVE-2026-116685 affects this package: high ▼ security
- CVE-2026-116686 affects this package: high ▼ security
- CVE-2026-116684 affects this package: high ▼ security
- 24 Oct 26 0
- Stability: 0.97 → pass security
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/uptocode@1.0.0
Provenance Verified
A signed build attestation was found and verified, binding this exact artifact to the source repository it claims to come from.
| Result | Verified |
|---|---|
| Ecosystem | pypi |
| Reason | Verified |
| Discovered via | Registry attestation endpoint |
| Source repo | DDYRich72/UpToCode |
| Certificate issuer | https://token.actions.githubusercontent.com |
| Certificate SAN | https://github.com/DDYRich72/UpToCode/.github/workflows/release.yml@refs/tags/v1.0.0 |
| Rekor log index | 2206987355 |
| Predicate type | PyPI publish attestation https://docs.pypi.org/attestations/publish/v1 |
| Subject digest | sha256:b84c0bcdac6bb8dbc46f534e665608e4567499f2576b21cf2fa7c82bddca33fa |
Background: How many MCP packages publish verified provenance →
Install scripts 1 script
| Hook | Tier | Command |
|---|---|---|
| build_backend | Known build tool | hatchling.build |
Background: Why install scripts are a supply-chain risk →
Vulnerabilities 4 findings
| ID | CVE | Severity | Vector | Fix available |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GHSA-5h93-6whr-6q8j | CVE-2026-116685 | medium | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N | yes |
| GHSA-84m7-p3x7-pcfv | CVE-2026-59951 | high | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H | yes |
| GHSA-rwrf-2pqf-9j8j | CVE-2026-116686 | medium | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H | yes |
| GHSA-w4fh-qvv9-3v23 | CVE-2026-116684 | medium | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N | yes |
Background: What a vulnerability scan can and cannot prove →
Dependencies 44 packages
| Packages resolved | 44 |
|---|---|
| Stale | 5 |
| 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 →
audit_diff ~65
No description provided.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| diff | string | yes | Unified diff with file headers, hunks, and context (maximum 4 MiB). |
| judgment | boolean | – | Enable optional bounded model judgment; false keeps analysis offline. |
| send_code | boolean | – | Explicit consent to send redacted excerpts when judgment is enabled. |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| analysis_warnings | array | – | – |
| coverage | – | – | – |
| findings | array | – | – |
| generated_at | string | – | – |
| judgment_status | string | – | – |
| judgment_usage | – | – | – |
| metadata | – | – | – |
| redactions | – | – | – |
| rule_results | array | – | – |
| scan_root | string | yes | – |
| schema_version | string | – | – |
| suppressions | integer | – | – |
| tool_version | string | – | – |
No examples provided.
audit_file ~58
No description provided.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| judgment | boolean | – | Enable optional bounded model judgment; false keeps analysis offline. |
| path | string | yes | Local path that must resolve inside the configured workspace root. |
| send_code | boolean | – | Explicit consent to send redacted excerpts when judgment is enabled. |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| analysis_warnings | array | – | – |
| coverage | – | – | – |
| findings | array | – | – |
| generated_at | string | – | – |
| judgment_status | string | – | – |
| judgment_usage | – | – | – |
| metadata | – | – | – |
| redactions | – | – | – |
| rule_results | array | – | – |
| scan_root | string | yes | – |
| schema_version | string | – | – |
| suppressions | integer | – | – |
| tool_version | string | – | – |
No examples provided.
audit_repo ~58
No description provided.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| judgment | boolean | – | Enable optional bounded model judgment; false keeps analysis offline. |
| path | string | yes | Local path that must resolve inside the configured workspace root. |
| send_code | boolean | – | Explicit consent to send redacted excerpts when judgment is enabled. |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| analysis_warnings | array | – | – |
| coverage | – | – | – |
| findings | array | – | – |
| generated_at | string | – | – |
| judgment_status | string | – | – |
| judgment_usage | – | – | – |
| metadata | – | – | – |
| redactions | – | – | – |
| rule_results | array | – | – |
| scan_root | string | yes | – |
| schema_version | string | – | – |
| suppressions | integer | – | – |
| tool_version | string | – | – |
No examples provided.
audit_source ~91
Audit one explicitly submitted Python source document.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| filename | string | – | Contained relative Python filename used only for report locations. |
| judgment | boolean | – | Enable optional bounded model judgment; false keeps analysis offline. |
| send_code | boolean | – | Explicit consent to send redacted excerpts when judgment is enabled. |
| source | string | yes | One explicitly submitted UTF-8 Python source document (maximum 1 MiB). |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| analysis_warnings | array | – | – |
| coverage | – | – | – |
| findings | array | – | – |
| generated_at | string | – | – |
| judgment_status | string | – | – |
| judgment_usage | – | – | – |
| metadata | – | – | – |
| redactions | – | – | – |
| rule_results | array | – | – |
| scan_root | string | yes | – |
| schema_version | string | – | – |
| suppressions | integer | – | – |
| tool_version | string | – | – |
No examples provided.
check_loop ~42
Check a bounded Python loop or Runner invocation for AA001.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| snippet | string | yes | One explicitly submitted UTF-8 Python source document (maximum 1 MiB). |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| analysis_warnings | array | – | – |
| findings | array | – | – |
| redactions | – | – | – |
No examples provided.
check_tool_schema ~43
Validate a strict function-tool descriptor and JSON Schema 2020-12 input.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| schema_json | string | yes | Strict JSON document for the named UpToCode contract. |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| issues | array | yes | – |
| judgment_status | string | – | – |
| valid | boolean | yes | – |
No examples provided.
generate_fixplan ~56
Generate a non-mutating remediation plan from approved findings.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| manifest_json | string | yes | Strict JSON document for the named UpToCode contract. |
| report_json | string | yes | Strict JSON document for the named UpToCode contract. |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| markdown | string | yes | – |
No examples provided.
get_rule ~36
Return trusted metadata for one rule identifier.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| rule_id | string | yes | UpToCode rule identifier in AA001 through AA012 form. |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| error_code | – | – | – |
| message | – | – | – |
| rule | – | – | – |
No examples provided.
list_rules ~18
Return the complete trusted UpToCode rule catalog.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| rules | array | yes | – |
No examples provided.
review_findings ~83
Create an immutable review manifest from explicit finding decisions.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| approve | – | – | Finding fingerprints or rule identifiers to decide. |
| approve_all | boolean | – | Approve every finding in the exact supplied Report 2.0 document. |
| reject | – | – | Finding fingerprints or rule identifiers to decide. |
| report_json | string | yes | Strict JSON document for the named UpToCode contract. |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| created_at | string | – | – |
| decisions | array | yes | – |
| report_fingerprint | string | yes | – |
| schema_version | string | – | – |
No examples provided.
How do I install the UpToCode MCP server?
UpToCode runs locally as a PyPI package, launched with uvx uptocode serve --transport stdio. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 3 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.
pypi · uptocode
claude mcp add ddyrich72-uptocode -- uvx uptocode serve --transport stdio
What is the UpToCode MCP server?
UpToCode is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.DDYRich72/uptocode. Evidence-backed architecture-quality analysis for Python agent applications. This page covers its PyPI package (uptocode).
Is the UpToCode MCP server safe to use?
UpToCode scores 90 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. We recorded 4 known advisories against it as of 5 November 2026. Its build provenance is signed and verified. 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 UpToCode MCP server expose?
UpToCode exposes 10 tools: audit_source, check_tool_schema, check_loop, list_rules, get_rule, and 5 more. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 550 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Is the UpToCode MCP server still maintained?
UpToCode 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 UpToCode MCP server under?
UpToCode 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 UpToCode MCP server?
VerifyMCP ran 16 checks on UpToCode, covering Malware scan, Known CVEs, Install scripts, Dependency health and 12 more. Endpoint Security and Transport & Reachability do not apply to a PyPI package, so they were not tested. The score does not measure everything, and the scoring documentation lists what it leaves out.