io.github.dingdawg/dingdawg-code-review
NPM · DINGDAWG-CODE-REVIEW · SCANNED AUG 3
AI code review — security, quality, performance. Learns your patterns. Receipted.
Available components
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 →
Supply Chain Security86
- No malware found by supply-chain analysis.Pass
- Only part of the dependency tree could be resolved (94 of 98), so this covers what we could see, not the whole tree.Partial
- No install/post-install scripts declared.Pass
- Only part of the dependency tree could be resolved (94 of 98), so this covers what we could see, not the whole tree. 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 (MIT).Pass
- Actively maintained (last published 27 days ago).Pass
- Disclosure check failed: no security disclosure policy was found in the source repository. See how to fix → Fail
Schema Quality & AI Usability71
- AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
- Tool/resource definitions use about 280 tokens (~93/item across 3 items; 3 tools + 0 resources), lean.Pass
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management27
- Stability observed for 8 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
Capabilities100
- Implements a supported MCP spec version (2025-11-25); the latest is 2026-07-28.Pass
Add this component to your MCP client. Where a client-specific snippet is available, pick your client below and copy it straight into your config; otherwise use the connection detail shown.
npm · dingdawg-code-review
claude mcp add dingdawg-dingdawg-code-review -- npx -y dingdawg-code-review
codex mcp add dingdawg-dingdawg-code-review -- npx -y dingdawg-code-review
{
"$schema": "https://opencode.ai/config.json",
"mcp": {
"dingdawg-dingdawg-code-review": {
"type": "local",
"command": [
"npx",
"-y",
"dingdawg-code-review"
],
"enabled": true
}
}
} openclaw mcp add dingdawg-dingdawg-code-review --command npx --arg -y --arg dingdawg-code-review
mcp_servers:
dingdawg-dingdawg-code-review:
command: "npx"
args: ["-y", "dingdawg-code-review"] {
"mcpServers": {
"dingdawg-dingdawg-code-review": {
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"-y",
"dingdawg-code-review"
]
}
}
} 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 Aug 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 23 to 27. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 7 days of observed history at the previous scan, 8 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 2 Aug 26 +38
- Install scripts: pass → unverified ▼ security
- Provenance: fail → unverified ▼ security
- Known CVEs: unverified → partial ▲ security
- Malware scan: unverified → pass ▲ security
- Maintenance: pass → unverified ▼ functional
- License: pass → unverified ▼ functional
- Stability: unverified → 0.23 ▲ functional
- MCP protocol: unverified → pass ▲ functional
- Dependency health: unverified → partial ▲ functional
- Schema quality: unverified → good ▲ functional
- Licence: MIT functional
- 1 Aug 26 −9
- We updated how we score, so this day's move reflects our rubric, not a change to the server See what changed → functional
- 31 Jul 26 +13
- Provenance: unverified → fail ▼ security
- Malware scan: pass → unverified ▼ security
- Install scripts: unverified → pass ▲ security
- Dependency health: partial → unverified ▼ functional
- Maintenance: unverified → pass ▲ functional
- License: unverified → pass ▲ functional
- Tool coverage: unverified → 100 ▲ functional
- Licence: MIT functional
- 29 Jul 26 −21
- Tool coverage: 100 → unverified ▼ functional
- Dependency health: unverified → partial ▲ functional
- First check of Schema quality: unverified functional
- 27 Jul 26 46
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 3 Aug 2026 · Analysed npm/[email protected]
Provenance none
Ecosystem: npm · Outcome: none
Dependencies 94 packages
94 packages in the resolved dependency tree · 94 deprecated · 29 stale.
The dependency tree was only partially resolved, so these counts may be incomplete.
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.
review_code ~105
Scan code for security vulnerabilities, code quality issues, performance problems, and best practice violations. Returns findings with severity levels, line hints, and fix suggestions. FREE: 10 reviews/day. Deep LLM-powered analysis available with API key.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| code | string | yes | The code snippet or file contents to review |
| filename | string | — | Filename for context (e.g., 'auth.ts') |
| language | string | — | Programming language (typescript, javascript, python, etc.) |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
review_pr ~91
Review a pull request diff. Checks for breaking changes, security issues, test coverage gaps. Returns structured review with approve/request-changes decision. FREE: 5 PR reviews/day. Deep LLM-powered review available with API key.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| description | string | — | PR description for context |
| diff | string | yes | The unified diff content of the pull request |
| title | string | — | PR title for context |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
suggest_fix ~84
Given a finding ID from review_code or review_pr, generate a fix suggestion. FREE: 20 suggestions/day. LLM-powered code generation available with API key.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| code_context | string | — | The code surrounding the finding for a more targeted fix |
| finding_id | string | yes | The finding ID from a review (e.g., SEC-001, QUAL-003) |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.