flowR
NPM · @EAGLEOUTICE/FLOWR-MCP
Static dataflow analysis, program slicing, linting, and dependency extraction for R code.
Available components
Last scanned (3 hours ago)
Scores higher than 50% of npm servers
Category Developer Tools
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 Security73
- No malware found by supply-chain analysis.Pass
- Known CVEs could not be checked: we could not reach the advisory database to check. This is a gap on our side.Unverified
- No install/post-install scripts declared.Pass
- 34 of 82 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 flowr-analysis/flowr). View diagnostics → Pass
- Clear OSI-approved license (ISC).Pass
- Actively maintained (last published 13 days ago).Pass
- Publishes a security disclosure policy (SECURITY.md).Pass
Schema Quality & AI Usability50
- AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
- Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 455 tokens (~455/item across 1 items; 1 tools + 0 resources), over budget; trim descriptions and params. See how to fix → Fail
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management53
- Stability observed for 16 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
Tool Coverage89
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 67% 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 1 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 1 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.
- 5 Nov 26 −8
- Known CVEs: pass → unverified ▼ security
- 4 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 47 to 50. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 14 days of observed history at the previous scan, 15 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 40 to 43. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 12 days of observed history at the previous scan, 13 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 33 to 37. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 10 days of observed history at the previous scan, 11 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 29 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 27 to 30. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 8 days of observed history at the previous scan, 9 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 27 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 20 to 23. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 6 days of observed history at the previous scan, 7 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 25 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 13 to 17. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 4 days of observed history at the previous scan, 5 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 23 Oct 26 +28
- Injection markers: unverified → pass ▲ security
- Tool coverage: unverified → 100 ▲ functional
- Stability: unverified → 0.10 ▲ functional
- MCP protocol: unverified → pass ▲ 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 5 Nov 2026 · Analysed npm/@eagleoutice/flowr-mcp@0.1.3
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 | flowr-analysis/flowr |
| Certificate issuer | https://token.actions.githubusercontent.com |
| Certificate SAN | https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/.github/workflows/mcp.yaml@refs/heads/main |
| Rekor log index | 3392461360 |
| Predicate type | SLSA build provenance https://slsa.dev/provenance/v1 |
| Subject digest | sha512:d2a2371d56d0e586584b4fc3642250363a2cbef891b0cc710e6eeb1939fc31824f046dd9c9d7bf21c7a71bb91220880e8761236108a9d67c475d4135f |
Background: How many MCP packages publish verified provenance →
Dependencies 82 packages
| Packages resolved | 82 |
|---|---|
| Stale | 34 |
| 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 →
query ~455
Statically analyze R code and search R package signatures with flowR queries (https://github.com/flowr-analysis/flowr/wiki/Query-API). Common ones: {"type":"static-slice","criteria":["12@x"]} for the code affecting x in line 12, {"type":"linter"} for lint findings, {"type":"dependencies"} for loaded libraries, read and written files, {"type":"guess-dep-versions"} for the package versions the code works with, {"type":"call-context","callName":"^read_"} for calls, and, needing no code, {"type":"signature","package":"dplyr","function":"across"} to search signatures and versions (globs allowed), {"type":"function-info","name":"filter"} for the packages exporting a function. A query with wrong arguments is answered with its schema. Types: call-context (Call-Context Query), config (Config Query), control-flow (Control-Flow Query), call-graph (Call-Graph Query), dataflow (Dataflow Query), does-call (Does-Call Query), dataflow-lens (Dataflow Lens Query), absint (Abstract Interpretation Query), files (Files Query), id-map (Id-Map Query), normalized-ast (Normalized AST Query), dataflow-cluster (Dataflow Cluster Query), static-slice (Static Slice Query), provenance (Provenance Query), input-sources (Input Sources Query), dependencies (Dependencies Query), location-map (Location Map Query), search (Search Query), happens-before (Happens-Before Query), inspect-exception (Inspect Exceptions of Functions Query), inspect-higher-order (Inspect Higher-Order Functions Query), inspect-recursion (Inspect Recursive Functions Query), inspect-fn-props (Inspect Argument Roles Query), resolve-value (Resolve Value Query), project (Project Query), signature (Signature Query), origin (Origin Query), linter (Linter Query), dice (Dice Query), guess-dep-versions (Guess Dependency Versions Query), function-info (Function Info Query)
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| code | string | – | R code to analyze. |
| files | array | – | R files or project folders to analyze. |
| queries | array | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the flowR MCP server?
flowR runs locally as an npm package, launched with npx -y @eagleoutice/flowr-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 · @eagleoutice/flowr-mcp
claude mcp add flowr-analysis-flowr -- npx -y @eagleoutice/flowr-mcp
What is the flowR MCP server?
flowR is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.flowr-analysis/flowr. Static dataflow analysis, program slicing, linting, and dependency extraction for R code. This page covers its npm package (@eagleoutice/flowr-mcp).
Is the flowR MCP server safe to use?
flowR scores 75 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. 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 flowR MCP server expose?
flowR exposes 1 tool: query. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 455 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Is the flowR MCP server still maintained?
flowR 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 flowR MCP server under?
flowR declares the ISC licence, which is OSI-approved. That covers the source only, and says nothing about the cost of any service it calls.