Crispy Profiling
NPM · CRISPY-PROFILING
Deterministic React render profiling: renders, wasted renders and their causes per component.
Available components
Last scanned (19 hours ago)
Scores higher than 91% of npm 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 Security98
- No malware found by supply-chain analysis.Pass
- No known CVEs affecting this package version or its production dependencies.Pass
- No install/post-install scripts declared.Pass
- 31 of 96 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 edgeorgie/crispy-profiling). View diagnostics → Pass
- Clear OSI-approved license (MIT).Pass
- Actively maintained (last published 24 days ago).Pass
- Publishes a security disclosure policy (SECURITY.md).Pass
Schema Quality & AI Usability62
- AI-judged instruction clarity (fair).Partial
- Tool/resource definitions use about 648 tokens (~108/item across 6 items; 6 tools + 0 resources), lean.Pass
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management70
- Stability observed for 21 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
Tool Coverage80
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 39% of tool parameters carry a description.Partial
Tool Safety100
- No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
- We read all 6 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 6 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
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.
- 4 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 67 to 70. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 20 days of observed history at the previous scan, 21 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 2 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 60 to 63. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 18 days of observed history at the previous scan, 19 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 31 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 53 to 57. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 16 days of observed history at the previous scan, 17 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 28 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 43 to 47. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 13 days of observed history at the previous scan, 14 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 26 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 37 to 40. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 11 days of observed history at the previous scan, 12 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 24 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 30 to 33. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 9 days of observed history at the previous scan, 10 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 22 Oct 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.
- 21 Oct 26 +3
- Stability: unverified → 0.23 ▲ functional
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 4 Nov 2026 · Analysed npm/crispy-profiling@0.6.0
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 | npm |
| Reason | Verified |
| Discovered via | Registry attestation endpoint |
| Source repo | edgeorgie/crispy-profiling |
| Certificate issuer | https://token.actions.githubusercontent.com |
| Certificate SAN | https://github.com/edgeorgie/crispy-profiling/.github/workflows/release.yml@refs/heads/main |
| Rekor log index | 3190299245 |
| Predicate type | SLSA build provenance https://slsa.dev/provenance/v1 |
| Subject digest | sha512:0ac6100848c6e653b5d767b036cc6388033ed1894b7c425317b8bef838d4445fdacab785e0c98efd64742c93d3fcbe56c8aa24137d761c4dffd17e2c7 |
Background: How many MCP packages publish verified provenance →
Dependencies 96 packages
| Packages resolved | 96 |
|---|---|
| Stale | 31 |
| 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 →
compare_reports Compare two crispy reports ~62
Diffs a baseline report against a new one and lists render regressions and improvements per component.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| basePath | string | yes | – |
| headPath | string | yes | – |
| minRendersDelta | integer | – | – |
| rendersIncreasePct | number | – | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
inspect_component Inspect one component in a report ~59
Returns the full per-phase stats for one component (render causes and changed prop keys), which tells you whether to reach for React.memo, useCallback/useMemo or state colocation.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| component | string | yes | – |
| reportPath | string | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
profile_url Profile React renders of a URL ~177
Opens a URL in headless Chromium, optionally runs interaction steps, and reports which React components rendered, how often, why (props/state/context/parent) and which renders were wasted. Render counts are deterministic: use this before and after a change to verify a performance fix.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| outFile | string | – | Optional path to write the full JSON report |
| runs | integer | – | – |
| steps | array | – | Interactions to perform after load. Renders during them go to phase "interaction". |
| timings | boolean | – | Also measure JavaScript ms per phase (varies between runs, unlike render counts): use it to tell the user how much faster an interaction got. |
| top | integer | – | Components shown per phase |
| url | string | yes | Page to profile, e.g. http://localhost:5173/products |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
run_scenarios Run crispy.config.json scenarios ~78
Runs the scenarios defined in a crispy.config.json (budgets included) and returns a summary. Write the report to a file to compare it later with compare_reports.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| configPath | string | – | – |
| outFile | string | – | – |
| scenarios | array | – | Only run these scenario names |
| top | integer | – | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
scan_app Find and profile interactions automatically ~115
Zero-config start: opens the app, finds safe interactions on a few routes (buttons, tabs, text inputs; never delete/pay/sign-out/submit), profiles each one and returns the top root causes of avoidable renders with fixes, plus the scenarios as crispy.config.json scenarios so they can be saved and guarded with test_render_snapshots.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| maxActions | integer | – | Interactions per route |
| maxRoutes | integer | – | – |
| url | string | yes | Start page, e.g. http://localhost:5173/ |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
test_render_snapshots Check render counts against the committed snapshot ~157
Runs the crispy.config.json scenarios and compares render counts with the committed snapshot (crispy.snap.json), like snapshot tests for re-renders. Regressions include the unstable prop, where the component is rendered and a suggested fix. Read-only by default: it never edits an existing snapshot. With no snapshot yet, update=true records the first one (it only stores the current counts). To accept changed counts later, the USER must approve; then pass update=true together with confirm="accept-render-changes".
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| configPath | string | – | – |
| confirm | string | – | Must be "accept-render-changes" (after explicit user approval) when update=true |
| scenarios | array | – | – |
| update | boolean | – | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the Crispy Profiling MCP server?
Crispy Profiling runs locally as an npm package, launched with npx -y crispy-profiling. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.
npm · crispy-profiling
claude mcp add edgeorgie-crispy-profiling -- npx -y crispy-profiling
What is the Crispy Profiling MCP server?
Crispy Profiling is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.edgeorgie/crispy-profiling. Deterministic React render profiling: renders, wasted renders and their causes per component. This page covers its npm package (crispy-profiling).
Is the Crispy Profiling MCP server safe to use?
Crispy Profiling scores 87 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. We found no known CVEs affecting it as of 4 November 2026. It declares no install or post-install scripts. 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 Crispy Profiling MCP server expose?
Crispy Profiling exposes 6 tools: profile_url, scan_app, run_scenarios, test_render_snapshots, compare_reports, inspect_component. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 648 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Is the Crispy Profiling MCP server still maintained?
Crispy Profiling is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 4 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 Crispy Profiling MCP server under?
Crispy Profiling declares the MIT licence, which is OSI-approved. That covers the source only, and says nothing about the cost of any service it calls.