Moretes Architect MCP
NPM · MORETES-AWS-ARCHITECT-MCP · 2 COMPONENTS
Evidence-first architecture workbench: 48 deterministic tools, 10 architect personas, any cloud
Available components
Last scanned (4 hours ago)
Scores higher than 68% of npm servers
Category Cloud Infrastructure
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 Security99
- 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
- 30 of 124 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 fernando-moretes/moretes-aws-architect-mcp). View diagnostics → Pass
- Clear OSI-approved license (MIT).Pass
- Actively maintained (last published 9 days ago).Pass
- Publishes a security disclosure policy (SECURITY.md).Pass
Schema Quality & AI Usability72
- 100% of prompts and resources have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the item's name).Pass
- AI-judged instruction clarity (fair).Partial
- Tool/resource definitions use about 3688 tokens (~55/item across 66 items; 48 tools + 18 resources), lean.Pass
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management33
- Stability observed for 10 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
Tool Coverage71
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 0% of tool parameters carry a description.Fail
- Structured output schemas are declared (88% of tools); any adoption earns full credit.Pass
Tool Safety75
- No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
- 0 of 1 tool(s) whose name or description implies an irreversible operation declare an MCP destructiveHint annotation; "agent_eval_plan" implies "eval" and declares readOnlyHint instead, contradicting what its own name says it does. See how to fix → Fail
- An AI judge read all 50 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.
- 3 Nov 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.
- 1 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 17 to 20. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 5 days of observed history at the previous scan, 6 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 30 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 10 to 13. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 3 days of observed history at the previous scan, 4 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 28 Oct 26 +16
- Malware scan: unverified → pass ▲ security
- 27 Oct 26 0
- Stability: unverified → 0.03 ▲ functional
- Package version: 0.4.0 → 0.4.1 functional
- 26 Oct 26 62
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 5 Nov 2026 · Analysed npm/moretes-aws-architect-mcp@0.4.1
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 | fernando-moretes/moretes-aws-architect-mcp |
| Certificate issuer | https://token.actions.githubusercontent.com |
| Certificate SAN | https://github.com/fernando-moretes/moretes-aws-architect-mcp/.github/workflows/publish.yml@refs/tags/v0.4.1 |
| Rekor log index | 3503017726 |
| Predicate type | SLSA build provenance https://slsa.dev/provenance/v1 |
| Subject digest | sha512:604b7079bd9ffc827b4d78b87f29ad1ff7c6aebda7f1aa8f33ff386c0b6c7256f6bc2979fc5f25d4521c32262064571fe8664bc8216e80822570bf3ff |
Background: How many MCP packages publish verified provenance →
Dependencies 124 packages
| Packages resolved | 124 |
|---|---|
| Stale | 30 |
| 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 →
service_compare ~38
Compare curated AWS service families against user constraints. No automatic winner or fabricated scores.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| constraints | array | yes | – |
| family | string | yes | – |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| constraints | array | – | – |
| decisionRequired | string|null | – | – |
| kind | string|null | – | – |
| limitation | string|null | – | – |
| options | array | – | – |
| sources | array | – | – |
| validated | boolean|null | – | – |
No examples provided.
service_equivalents ~76
Map a cloud capability to equivalent managed services on AWS, Azure, Google Cloud, OCI and open source. Names as of the snapshot date; verify current naming, regions and pricing before deciding.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| categories | array | – | – |
| from | string | yes | – |
| query | string | – | – |
| to | array | yes | – |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| categories | array | – | – |
| from | string|null | – | – |
| kind | string|null | – | – |
| limitation | string|null | – | – |
| rows | array | – | – |
| snapshotDate | string|null | – | – |
No examples provided.
slo_budget ~44
Calculate an availability error budget for a chosen period.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| availabilityPercent | number | yes | – |
| periodDays | integer | yes | – |
| usedDowntimeMinutes | number | yes | – |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| allowedDowntimeMinutes | number|null | – | – |
| availabilityPercent | number|null | – | – |
| exhausted | boolean|null | – | – |
| kind | string|null | – | – |
| limitation | string|null | – | – |
| periodDays | number|null | – | – |
| remainingMinutes | number|null | – | – |
| usedDowntimeMinutes | number|null | – | – |
No examples provided.
storage_growth ~114
Project storage volume and relative cost over time from ingest, retention, compression, replication and growth; suggests tiering thresholds.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| coldTierPricePerGBMonth | number | – | – |
| compressionRatio | number | yes | – |
| dailyIngestGB | number | yes | – |
| hotDays | integer | yes | – |
| hotTierPricePerGBMonth | number | – | – |
| monthlyGrowthPercent | number | yes | – |
| months | integer | yes | – |
| replicationFactor | number | yes | – |
| retentionDays | integer | yes | – |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| assumptions | object | – | – |
| finalStoredGB | number|null | – | – |
| finalStoredTB | number|null | – | – |
| kind | string|null | – | – |
| limitations | array | – | – |
| series | array | – | – |
| steadyState | boolean|null | – | – |
| tiering | string|null | – | – |
No examples provided.
terraform_plan_review ~64
Review a Terraform or OpenTofu plan exported as JSON (terraform show -json): deletions and replacements of stateful resources, public exposure, disabled encryption, literal credentials, broad policies and unpinned providers. Any provider; heuristic.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| plan | object | yes | – |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| actions | object | – | – |
| findings | array | – | – |
| gate | string|null | – | – |
| kind | string|null | – | – |
| limitation | string|null | – | – |
| limitations | array | – | – |
| resources | number|null | – | – |
| sources | array | – | – |
| summary | object | – | – |
| terraformVersion | string|null | – | – |
| validated | boolean|null | – | – |
No examples provided.
threat_model ~50
Create STRIDE review prompts for explicitly supplied assets and trust boundaries. Review aid, not a scanner.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| assets | array | yes | – |
| boundaries | array | yes | – |
| dataClassification | string | yes | – |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| assets | array | – | – |
| boundaries | array | – | – |
| dataClassification | string|null | – | – |
| kind | string|null | – | – |
| limitation | string|null | – | – |
| sources | array | – | – |
| threats | array | – | – |
| validated | boolean|null | – | – |
No examples provided.
well_architected_review ~43
Organize evidence by six pillars. A met control without evidence is unknown, never certified.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| controls | array | yes | – |
| workload | string | yes | – |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| controls | array | – | – |
| kind | string|null | – | – |
| limitation | string|null | – | – |
| missingPillars | array | – | – |
| next | string|null | – | – |
| sources | array | – | – |
| summary | object | – | – |
| validated | boolean|null | – | – |
| workload | string|null | – | – |
No examples provided.
How do I install the Moretes Architect MCP server?
Moretes Architect MCP runs locally as an npm package, launched with npx -y moretes-aws-architect-mcp. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.
npm · moretes-aws-architect-mcp
claude mcp add fernando-moretes-moretes-aws-architect-mcp -- npx -y moretes-aws-architect-mcp
What is the Moretes Architect MCP server?
Moretes Architect MCP is listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.fernando-moretes/moretes-aws-architect-mcp. Evidence-first architecture workbench: 48 deterministic tools, 10 architect personas, any cloud. This page covers its npm package (moretes-aws-architect-mcp).
Is the Moretes Architect MCP server safe to use?
Moretes Architect MCP scores 81 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. We found no known CVEs affecting it as of 5 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 Moretes Architect MCP server expose?
Moretes Architect MCP exposes 48 tools: architect_panel, code_review_architecture, dependency_manifest_review, requirements_check, architecture_pattern, and 43 more. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 3,134 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Is the Moretes Architect MCP server still maintained?
Moretes Architect MCP 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 Moretes Architect MCP server under?
Moretes Architect MCP declares the MIT licence, which is OSI-approved. That covers the source only, and says nothing about the cost of any service it calls.