# io.github.dingdawg/dingdawg-code-review (npm · dingdawg-code-review)

AI code review — security, quality, performance. Learns your patterns. Receipted.

- Trust score: 68/100 (medium)
- Change this week: +22
- Registry status: active
- Liveness: live
- Owner verified: no
- Last scored: 2026-08-03

## Components

- npm · `dingdawg-code-review`: 68/100 (this document), [markdown](https://verifymcp.io/servers/dingdawg-dingdawg-code-review/dingdawg-code-review.md), [page](https://verifymcp.io/servers/dingdawg-dingdawg-code-review/dingdawg-code-review)

## Channel facts

- Registry: `npm`
- Package: `dingdawg-code-review`
- Version: `2.0.6`
- 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 2026-08-03.

- **Supply Chain Security**: 86/100
  - No malware found by supply-chain analysis.
  - Only part of the dependency tree could be resolved (94 of 98), so this covers what we could see, not the whole tree.
  - No install/post-install scripts declared.
  - Only part of the dependency tree could be resolved (94 of 98), so this covers what we could see, not the whole tree.
- **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 27 days ago).
  - Disclosure check failed: no security disclosure policy was found in the source repository.
- **Schema Quality & AI Usability**: 71/100
  - AI-judged instruction clarity (good).
  - Tool/resource definitions use about 280 tokens (~93/item across 3 items; 3 tools + 0 resources), lean.
  - Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples.
- **Stability & Change Management**: 27/100
  - Stability observed for 8 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.
- **Capabilities**: 100/100
  - Implements a supported MCP spec version (2025-11-25); the latest is 2026-07-28.

## Install

### Claude

```bash
claude mcp add dingdawg-dingdawg-code-review -- npx -y dingdawg-code-review
```

### Codex

```bash
codex mcp add dingdawg-dingdawg-code-review -- npx -y dingdawg-code-review
```

### opencode

```json
{
  "$schema": "https://opencode.ai/config.json",
  "mcp": {
    "dingdawg-dingdawg-code-review": {
      "type": "local",
      "command": [
        "npx",
        "-y",
        "dingdawg-code-review"
      ],
      "enabled": true
    }
  }
}
```

### OpenClaw

```bash
openclaw mcp add dingdawg-dingdawg-code-review --command npx --arg -y --arg dingdawg-code-review
```

### Hermes

```yaml
mcp_servers:
  dingdawg-dingdawg-code-review:
    command: "npx"
    args: ["-y", "dingdawg-code-review"]
```

### Other

```json
{
  "mcpServers": {
    "dingdawg-dingdawg-code-review": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "dingdawg-code-review"
      ]
    }
  }
}
```

## 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.

### 2026-08-03 (score 68, +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.

### 2026-08-02 (score 67, +38)

- [security regression] Install scripts: pass → unverified
- [security regression] Provenance: fail → unverified
- [security improvement] Known CVEs: unverified → partial
- [security improvement] Malware scan: unverified → pass
- [functional regression] Maintenance: pass → unverified
- [functional regression] License: pass → unverified
- [functional improvement] Stability: unverified → 0.23
- [functional improvement] MCP protocol: unverified → pass
- [functional improvement] Dependency health: unverified → partial
- [functional improvement] Schema quality: unverified → good
- [functional] Licence: MIT

### 2026-08-01 (score 29, −9)

- [functional] We updated how we score, so this day's move reflects our rubric, not a change to the server

### 2026-07-31 (score 38, +13)

- [security regression] Provenance: unverified → fail
- [security regression] Malware scan: pass → unverified
- [security improvement] Install scripts: unverified → pass
- [functional regression] Dependency health: partial → unverified
- [functional improvement] Maintenance: unverified → pass
- [functional improvement] License: unverified → pass
- [functional improvement] Tool coverage: unverified → 100
- [functional] Licence: MIT

### 2026-07-29 (score 25, −21)

- [functional regression] Tool coverage: 100 → unverified
- [functional improvement] Dependency health: unverified → partial
- [functional] First check of Schema quality: unverified

### 2026-07-27 (score 46)

First indexed and scored.

## MCP tools (3)

### `review_code` (~105 tokens)

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.

Input parameters:

- `code` (string, required): 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.)

### `review_pr` (~91 tokens)

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.

Input parameters:

- `description` (string): PR description for context
- `diff` (string, required): The unified diff content of the pull request
- `title` (string): PR title for context

### `suggest_fix` (~84 tokens)

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.

Input parameters:

- `code_context` (string): The code surrounding the finding for a more targeted fix
- `finding_id` (string, required): The finding ID from a review (e.g., SEC-001, QUAL-003)

## Diagnostics

Captured diagnostic sections: Provenance, Dependencies. The full working is on the page: https://verifymcp.io/servers/dingdawg-dingdawg-code-review/dingdawg-code-review#diagnostics

## Score history

- 2026-08-03: 68
- 2026-08-02: 67
- 2026-08-01: 29
- 2026-07-31: 38
- 2026-07-29: 25
- 2026-07-28: 46
- 2026-07-27: 46

## Links

- npm package: https://www.npmjs.com/package/dingdawg-code-review
- Socket report: https://socket.dev/npm/package/dingdawg-code-review
- Repository: https://github.com/dingdawg/dingdawg-agent-1
- Changelog RSS feed: https://verifymcp.io/servers/dingdawg-dingdawg-code-review/dingdawg-code-review/changelog.xml
- Changelog JSON feed: https://verifymcp.io/servers/dingdawg-dingdawg-code-review/dingdawg-code-review/changelog.json
- HTML version of this page: https://verifymcp.io/servers/dingdawg-dingdawg-code-review/dingdawg-code-review