io.github.jmshinhwa/dienstanweisung-bewachung-lint
NPM · @READYSTACK/DIENSTANWEISUNG-BEWACHUNG-LINT
Pflichtinhalte nach § 17, 18, 20 BewachV und § 34a Abs. 1a GewO
Available components
Last scanned (15 hours ago)
Scores higher than 47% 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 Security100
- 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
- No production dependencies, so there is no dependency health to assess. View diagnostics → Pass
Provenance & Transparency26
- Source repository is publicly reachable at the declared URL. View diagnostics → Pass
- Provenance check failed: no build-provenance attestation is published. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
- Licence could not be checked: the licence is shipped as a file inside the package, not declared as a standard (SPDX) licence identifier, so we cannot tell whether it is OSI-approved.Unverified
- Maintenance check failed: the publisher has marked this version as deprecated on the registry, telling users to stop installing it. See how to fix → Fail
- Disclosure check failed: no security disclosure policy was found in the source repository. See how to fix → Fail
Schema Quality & AI Usability57
- AI-judged instruction clarity (fair).Partial
- Tool/resource definitions use about 151 tokens (~50/item across 3 items; 3 tools + 0 resources), lean.Pass
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management87
- Stability observed for 26 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
Tool Coverage87
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 60% 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
Capabilities60
- Spec-recency check failed: implements MCP spec 2025-06-18; the latest is 2026-07-28. See how to fix → Fail
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.
- 24 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 83 to 87. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 25 days of observed history at the previous scan, 26 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 21 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 73 to 77. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 22 days of observed history at the previous scan, 23 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 19 Oct 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.
- 17 Oct 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.
- 15 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.
- 13 Oct 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.
- 11 Oct 26 +2
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 33 to 43. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 10 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.
- 8 Oct 26 +3
- Maintenance: pass → fail ▼ functional
- Stability: unverified → 0.33 ▲ 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 24 Oct 2026 · Analysed npm/@readystack/dienstanweisung-bewachung-lint@1.0.1
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 0 packages
| Packages resolved | 0 |
|---|---|
| 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 →
check_dir ~59
Dienstanweisung Bewachung: BewachV-Check - sweep a folder and return every finding (licence; $29 once)
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| dir | string | yes | – |
| ext | string | – | optional extension filter, e.g. .html |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
check_file ~39
Dienstanweisung Bewachung: BewachV-Check - run all checks on one file by path (free)
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | string | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
check_text ~53
Dienstanweisung Bewachung: BewachV-Check - run all 12 checks on a text (free)
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | string | – | optional file name for context |
| text | string | yes | file contents |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the io.github.jmshinhwa/dienstanweisung-bewachung-lint MCP server?
io.github.jmshinhwa/dienstanweisung-bewachung-lint runs locally as an npm package, launched with npx -y @readystack/dienstanweisung-bewachung-lint. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.
npm · @readystack/dienstanweisung-bewachung-lint
claude mcp add jmshinhwa-dienstanweisung-bewachung-lint -- npx -y @readystack/dienstanweisung-bewachung-lint
What is the io.github.jmshinhwa/dienstanweisung-bewachung-lint MCP server?
io.github.jmshinhwa/dienstanweisung-bewachung-lint is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.jmshinhwa/dienstanweisung-bewachung-lint. Pflichtinhalte nach § 17, 18, 20 BewachV und § 34a Abs. 1a GewO. This page covers its npm package (@readystack/dienstanweisung-bewachung-lint).
Is the io.github.jmshinhwa/dienstanweisung-bewachung-lint MCP server safe to use?
io.github.jmshinhwa/dienstanweisung-bewachung-lint scores 73 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. We found no known CVEs affecting it as of 24 October 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.jmshinhwa/dienstanweisung-bewachung-lint MCP server expose?
io.github.jmshinhwa/dienstanweisung-bewachung-lint exposes 3 tools: check_text, check_file, check_dir. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 151 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Is the io.github.jmshinhwa/dienstanweisung-bewachung-lint MCP server still maintained?
io.github.jmshinhwa/dienstanweisung-bewachung-lint is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 24 October 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.