io.github.infoinlet-marketplace/mcp-codeaudit
NPM · @INFOINLET/MCP-CODEAUDIT
Security audit for AI agents — scan code/diffs for leaked secrets, check deps via OSV.
Available components
Last scanned (13 hours ago)
Scores higher than 51% of npm servers
Category Security
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
- 33 of 106 dependencies flagged as unhealthy. View diagnostics → Partial
Provenance & Transparency19
- Repository check failed: the declared repository URL returned HTTP 404. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
- Provenance check failed: no build-provenance attestation is published. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
- Clear OSI-approved license (MIT).Pass
- Actively maintained (last published 159 days ago).Pass
- Security-disclosure policy not yet verified: we couldn't inspect the source repository.Unverified
Schema Quality & AI Usability69
- AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
- Tool/resource definitions use about 112 tokens (~56/item across 2 items; 2 tools + 0 resources), lean.Pass
- 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 Coverage67
- 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
Tool Safety100
- No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
- We read all 2 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 2 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
Checks we ran (15)
- Malware scan
- Known CVEs
- Install scripts
- Dependency health
- Source repository
- Provenance
- License
- Maintenance
- Schema quality
- Stability
- Tool coverage
- Injection markers
- Destructive annotations
- Judged manipulation
- MCP protocol
Checks we could not complete (1)
These are gaps on our side, not findings about this package. We only credit what we can confirm, so a category made up entirely of them scores 0.
- Security disclosure in Provenance & TransparencySecurity-disclosure policy not yet verified: we couldn't inspect the source repository.
Does not apply to this package (2)
- Endpoint SecurityScored on hosted endpoints only. A package has no live endpoint of its own for us to probe.
- Transport & ReachabilityScored on hosted endpoints only. A package has no live endpoint of its own for us to probe.
The score does not measure everything. What the score does not measure →
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.
- 2 Nov 26 0
- Stability: 0.97 → pass security
- 1 Nov 26 0
- Stability: pass → 0.97 functional
- 26 Oct 26 0
- Stability: 0.97 → pass security
- 25 Oct 26 0
- Stability: pass → 0.97 functional
- 19 Oct 26 0
- Stability: 0.97 → pass security
- 18 Oct 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.
- 16 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 87 to 90. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 26 days of observed history at the previous scan, 27 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 14 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 80 to 83. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 24 days of observed history at the previous scan, 25 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
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/@infoinlet/mcp-codeaudit@0.1.1
Provenance No attestation
The registry publishes no build provenance for this version, so there is nothing to verify.
| Result | No attestation |
|---|---|
| Ecosystem | npm |
Background: How many MCP packages publish verified provenance →
Dependencies 106 packages
| Packages resolved | 106 |
|---|---|
| Stale | 33 |
| 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 →
scan_dependencies ~54
Check dependencies for known vulnerabilities via OSV.dev. Provide a package.json (npm) or requirements.txt (PyPI).
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| content | string | – | – |
| ecosystem | string | – | – |
| file_path | string | – | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
scan_secrets ~58
Scan code/text for leaked secrets (AWS/GitHub/OpenAI/Stripe keys, private keys, JWTs, assigned passwords). Returns redacted findings with line numbers.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| content | string | – | – |
| file_path | string | – | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the io.github.infoinlet-marketplace/mcp-codeaudit server?
io.github.infoinlet-marketplace/mcp-codeaudit runs locally as an npm package, launched with npx -y @infoinlet/mcp-codeaudit. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.
npm · @infoinlet/mcp-codeaudit
claude mcp add infoinlet-marketplace-mcp-codeaudit -- npx -y @infoinlet/mcp-codeaudit
What is the io.github.infoinlet-marketplace/mcp-codeaudit server?
io.github.infoinlet-marketplace/mcp-codeaudit is listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.infoinlet-marketplace/mcp-codeaudit. Security audit for AI agents, scan code/diffs for leaked secrets, check deps via OSV. This page covers its npm package (@infoinlet/mcp-codeaudit).
Is the io.github.infoinlet-marketplace/mcp-codeaudit server safe to use?
io.github.infoinlet-marketplace/mcp-codeaudit scores 75 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. 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 io.github.infoinlet-marketplace/mcp-codeaudit server expose?
io.github.infoinlet-marketplace/mcp-codeaudit exposes 2 tools: scan_secrets, scan_dependencies. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 112 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Is the io.github.infoinlet-marketplace/mcp-codeaudit server still maintained?
io.github.infoinlet-marketplace/mcp-codeaudit 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 io.github.infoinlet-marketplace/mcp-codeaudit server under?
io.github.infoinlet-marketplace/mcp-codeaudit declares the MIT licence, which is OSI-approved. That covers the source only, and says nothing about the cost of any service it calls.
What did VerifyMCP test on the io.github.infoinlet-marketplace/mcp-codeaudit server?
VerifyMCP ran 15 checks on io.github.infoinlet-marketplace/mcp-codeaudit, covering Malware scan, Known CVEs, Install scripts, Dependency health and 11 more. One item could not be completed, a gap on our side rather than a finding about io.github.infoinlet-marketplace/mcp-codeaudit: Security disclosure. Endpoint Security and Transport & Reachability do not apply to an npm package, so they were not tested. The score does not measure everything, and the scoring documentation lists what it leaves out.