Flowgraf
REMOTE · FLOWGRAF.IN · 2 COMPONENTS · SCANNED SEP 20
Create and edit architecture diagrams from your AI agent; get an SVG and a live editable canvas.
Available components
How this component scores in each security and reliability category. Every signal is checked automatically against the live server, and we only credit what we can confirm. How we score → Why this is hard to score →
Endpoint Security63
- The endpoint's TLS certificate is valid, in date, and uses a strong key. View diagnostics → Pass
- Authorisation not fully verified: no authorisation is required to call this server, and 3 tool(s) never declared a destructiveHint. The MCP spec treats an absent hint as destructive by default, so we cannot call this surface safe. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Unverified
- HTTPS is enforced; there's no plaintext access path. View diagnostics → Pass
- The HSTS (Strict-Transport-Security) header is present. View diagnostics → Pass
- DNSSEC check failed: this domain isn't protected by DNSSEC. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
Transport & Reachability100
- Verified streamable-http transport via a live MCP handshake. View diagnostics → Pass
Schema Quality & AI Usability61
- AI-judged instruction clarity (excellent).Pass
- Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 1586 tokens (~528/item across 3 items; 3 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 Management100
- No destabilizing schema changes in the last 30 days.Pass
Tool Coverage90
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 71% 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 3 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 3 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
How do I install the Flowgraf MCP server?
Flowgraf is a hosted endpoint at https://flowgraf.in/api/mcp, so there is nothing to install locally. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.
remote · flowgraf.in
claude mcp add --transport http in-flowgraf-flowgraf 'https://flowgraf.in/api/mcp'
{
"mcpServers": {
"in-flowgraf-flowgraf": {
"url": "https://flowgraf.in/api/mcp"
}
}
} {
"servers": {
"in-flowgraf-flowgraf": {
"type": "http",
"url": "https://flowgraf.in/api/mcp"
}
}
} [mcp_servers.in-flowgraf-flowgraf] url = "https://flowgraf.in/api/mcp"
{
"$schema": "https://opencode.ai/config.json",
"mcp": {
"in-flowgraf-flowgraf": {
"type": "remote",
"url": "https://flowgraf.in/api/mcp",
"enabled": true
}
}
} openclaw mcp add in-flowgraf-flowgraf --url 'https://flowgraf.in/api/mcp' --transport streamable-http
mcp_servers:
in-flowgraf-flowgraf:
url: "https://flowgraf.in/api/mcp" {
"McpServers": {
"in-flowgraf-flowgraf": {
"Transport": "http",
"Url": "https://flowgraf.in/api/mcp"
}
}
} assistant mcp add in-flowgraf-flowgraf -t streamable-http -u 'https://flowgraf.in/api/mcp'
{
"mcpServers": {
"in-flowgraf-flowgraf": {
"type": "http",
"url": "https://flowgraf.in/api/mcp"
}
}
} The mcpServers block is a cross-client convention. Remote transports vary, so check your client's docs.
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.
- 6 Sept 26 +52
- Injection markers: unverified → pass ▲ security
- Stability: unverified → pass ▲ security
- Transport: fail → pass ▲ security
- Authorization: Authorisation not fully verified: no authorisation is required to call this server, and 3 tool(s) never declared a destructiveHint. The MCP spec treats an absent hint as destructive by default, so we cannot call this surface safe. security
- Endpoint reachability: not serving MCP → reachable ▲ functional
- Tool coverage: unverified → 100 ▲ functional
- MCP protocol: unverified → pass ▲ functional
- 28 Aug 26 −52
- Endpoint reachability: reachable → not serving MCP ▼ security
- Stability: pass → unverified ▼ security
- Tool safety: pass → unverified ▼ security
- Transport: pass → fail ▼ security
- Authorization: Authorisation not fully verified: no authorisation is required to connect, but we couldn't read the tool list to see what that exposes. security
- Capabilities: pass → unverified ▼ functional
- Tool coverage: 100 → unverified ▼ functional
- First check of Schema quality: unverified functional
- 26 Aug 26 +1
- We updated how we score, so this day's move reflects our rubric, not a change to the server See what changed → functional
- 25 Aug 26 0
- Stability: 0.97 → pass security
- 24 Aug 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 93 to 97. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 28 days of observed history at the previous scan, 29 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 11 Aug 26 0
- 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 0
- We updated how we score, so this day's move reflects our rubric, not a change to the server See what changed → functional
- 30 Jul 26 0
- We updated how we score, so this day's move reflects our rubric, not a change to the server See what changed → 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 20 Sept 2026 · Probed https://flowgraf.in/api/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=flowgraf.in | CN=YR1,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US | 8 Sept 2026 | 7 Dec 2026 | RSA 2048 | SHA256-RSA | 52af2945da442230e16fb2cb5b72f9d8b31 |
| SANs: flowgraf.in | ||||||
| CN=YR1,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US (CA) | CN=Root YR,O=ISRG,C=US | 3 Sept 2025 | 2 Sept 2028 | RSA 2048 | SHA256-RSA | a20253f15f2691c05dc1ce13b9bcca4e |
| CN=Root YR,O=ISRG,C=US (CA) | CN=ISRG Root X1,O=Internet Security Research Group,C=US | 13 May 2026 | 2 Sept 2032 | RSA 4096 | SHA256-RSA | f24b6d17f9d9ad7cb1c9fea78782699f |
Background: What to check on a remote MCP endpoint →
DNSSEC insecure
Validation of flowgraf.in. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | trust_anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| in. | present | 10094 | 13 | Verified |
| flowgraf.in. | absent | Unsigned (proven) parent-signed NSEC/NSEC3 proves an unsigned delegation |
Authentication No authorisation required
The endpoint answered without asking for a token. Anyone who knows the URL can reach it.
| Result | No authorisation required |
|---|---|
| HTTP status | 200 |
| Header | Value |
|---|---|
| strict-transport-security | max-age=63072000 |
| content-security-policy | frame-ancestors 'self'; base-uri 'self'; object-src 'none' |
| x-content-type-options | nosniff |
| x-frame-options | SAMEORIGIN |
| referrer-policy | strict-origin-when-cross-origin |
Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →
Transports 2 probes
| Transport | URL | Outcome | Status | Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| streamable-http | https://flowgraf.in/api/mcp | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://flowgraf.in/api/mcp | HTTPS enforced | 308 | https://flowgraf.in/api/mcp |
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 →
create_diagram Create architecture diagram ~791
Create a NEW architecture diagram from a graph that YOU author, and get back a shareable, editable canvas URL plus a rendered SVG and Mermaid. You produce only the SEMANTICS — nodes, the groups (VPC/cluster/...) they live in, and the directed edges between them. You do NOT lay anything out: never send x/y/position/pinned. A deterministic layout engine computes all geometry and an icon layer picks the pictures from each node's kind. kind.catalog is one of aws | gcp | azure | k8s | saas | generic, each with rich per-catalog kind.types (e.g. aws:lambda, gcp:bigquery, azure:cosmos_db, k8s:deployment, saas:kafka): - "aws" (api_gateway, lambda, s3, rds, dynamodb, sqs, bedrock, kinesis, fargate, eventbridge, aurora, ...). - "gcp" (compute_engine, gke, cloud_run, cloud_sql, spanner, firestore, bigquery, pubsub, dataflow, vertex_ai, ...). - "azure" (virtual_machine, aks, app_service, functions, blob_storage, sql_database, cosmos_db, service_bus, event_hubs, key_vault, ...). - "k8s" (pod, deployment, statefulset, daemonset, job, cronjob, service, ingress, configmap, secret, hpa, ...). - "saas" for hosted third-parties (redis, postgresql, mysql, mongodb, kafka, stripe, twilio, auth0, github, cloudflare, ...). - "generic" primitive when nothing branded fits: service, database, cache, queue, user, external_system, storage, gateway, function, note. - "generic" FLOWCHART kinds for processes/flowcharts: process, decision, terminator, data, document, subprocess. edge.kind is one of: request, response, async_event, data_flow, dependency, network, generic. WORKED EXAMPLE — a user hitting an API in a VPC that talks to Postgres: { "title": "Web API", "domain": "cloud_architecture", "graph": { "groups": [{ "id": "g_vpc", "label": "VPC", "type": "vpc" }], "nodes": [ { "id": "n_user", "label": "User", "kind": { "catalog": "generic", "type": "user" } }, { "id": "n_api", "label": "API", "kind": { "catalog": "aws", "type": "api_gateway" }, "parentId": "g_vpc" },…
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| domain | string | – | Optional domain hint (default: generic). |
| graph | object | yes | – |
| title | string | yes | A short title for the diagram. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
edit_diagram Edit architecture diagram ~722
Apply a list of operations to an EXISTING diagram. The ops re-use this tool's op vocabulary; you author them, we validate + apply + re-layout + re-render. ALWAYS call get_diagram(diagramId) first: it returns the current ids and the `version`. Pass that version as `baseVersion`. If the diagram changed since you fetched it, you get a STALE_VERSION error telling you the current version — refetch with get_diagram, recompute your ops, and retry. The operations (each element of `ops`): - add_node { op, node:{ id, label, kind, parentId? } } - remove_node { op, id } (also drops edges touching the node) - update_node { op, id, patch:{ label?, kind?, parentId?, metadata? } } - add_edge { op, edge:{ id, source, target, kind, label?, directed? } } - remove_edge { op, id } - update_edge { op, id, patch:{ source?, target?, label?, kind?, directed? } } - add_group { op, group:{ id, label, type, parentId? } } - remove_group{ op, id } - move_to_group { op, nodeId, groupId } (groupId null un-nests the node) - set_layout { op, patch:{ direction?, spacing? } } - insert_between { op, newNode:{ id, label, kind, parentId? }, sourceId, targetId, inKind?, outKind? } insert_between IS THE KEY OP for "add X between A and B" requests. It splices newNode onto the existing A→B edge: removes that edge, adds the node, and wires A→newNode→B so the connection re-routes through it automatically. WORKED EXAMPLE — "add a Redis cache between the API and the DB" on the diagram above: 1) get_diagram(diagramId) → shows nodes n_api, n_db and version 1. 2) edit_diagram({ diagramId, baseVersion: 1, ops: [ { "op": "insert_between", "sourceId": "n_api", "targetId": "n_db", "newNode": { "id": "n_redis", "label": "Redis", "kind": { "catalog": "saas", "type": "redis" }, "parentId": "g_vpc" }, "inKind": "request", "outKind": "data_flow" } ] }) The API→DB edge is gone and now flows API→Redis→DB. Never send x/y/position — geometry is computed for you.…
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| baseVersion | integer | yes | The version you are editing against — get it from get_diagram. Stale → STALE_VERSION. |
| diagramId | string | yes | The diagram to edit (from create_diagram or get_diagram). |
| ops | array | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_diagram Get architecture diagram ~73
Fetch a diagram's raw IR (nodes, groups, edges with their real ids) and its current `version`. Call this before edit_diagram so your ops reference ids that actually exist and you pass the correct baseVersion. Returns { diagram, version }.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| diagramId | string | yes | The diagram to fetch. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
What is the Flowgraf MCP server?
Flowgraf is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as in.flowgraf/flowgraf. Create and edit architecture diagrams from your AI agent; get an SVG and a live editable canvas. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://flowgraf.in/api/mcp).
Is the Flowgraf MCP server safe to use?
Flowgraf scores 77 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. 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 Flowgraf MCP server expose?
Flowgraf exposes 3 tools: create_diagram, edit_diagram, get_diagram. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 1,586 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the Flowgraf MCP server require authentication?
No. We connected to Flowgraf without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.
Is the Flowgraf MCP server still maintained?
Flowgraf is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 20 September 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.