io.github.kanywst/mcp-opa-authz
OCI · GHCR.IO/KANYWST/MCP-OPA-AUTHZ:0.3.0 · SCANNED SEP 20
Authorization answers from real policy code: evaluate Rego locally, or ask an AuthZEN 1.0 PDP.
Available components
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 Security0
- Malware scan not yet available for this package.Unverified
- Known CVEs could not be checked: this artifact ships no SBOM, so there is no dependency list to read. Publishing one would let us assess it.Unverified
- Install-script risk not yet assessed.Unverified
- Dependency health could not be checked: this artifact ships no SBOM, so there is no dependency list to read. Publishing one would let us assess it.Unverified
Provenance & Transparency48
- 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
- Clear OSI-approved license (MIT).Pass
- Actively maintained (last published 8 days ago).Pass
- Publishes a security disclosure policy (SECURITY.md).Pass
Schema Quality & AI Usability69
- AI-judged instruction clarity (excellent).Pass
- Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 1202 tokens (~300/item across 4 items; 4 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 Management30
- Stability observed for 9 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
Tool Coverage100
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 100% of tool parameters carry a description.Pass
- Structured output schemas are declared (100% of tools); any adoption earns full credit.Pass
Tool Safety100
- No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
- We read all 4 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 5 captured unit(s) of tool text and found none that tries to manipulate the model reading it.Pass
Capabilities100
- Implements a current MCP spec version (2026-07-28).Pass
Unverified: 1 category
A category scored 0 because we could not verify it: a data source with nothing on this package, evidence we could not reach, or a check we could not run. We only credit what we can confirm.
How do I install the io.github.kanywst/mcp-opa-authz server?
io.github.kanywst/mcp-opa-authz runs locally as a container image, launched with docker run --rm -i ghcr.io/kanywst/mcp-opa-authz:0.3.0. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 3 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.
oci · ghcr.io/kanywst/mcp-opa-authz:0.3.0
claude mcp add kanywst-mcp-opa-authz -- docker run --rm -i ghcr.io/kanywst/mcp-opa-authz:0.3.0
{
"mcpServers": {
"kanywst-mcp-opa-authz": {
"command": "docker",
"args": [
"run",
"--rm",
"-i",
"ghcr.io/kanywst/mcp-opa-authz:0.3.0"
]
}
}
} {
"servers": {
"kanywst-mcp-opa-authz": {
"command": "docker",
"args": [
"run",
"--rm",
"-i",
"ghcr.io/kanywst/mcp-opa-authz:0.3.0"
]
}
}
} codex mcp add kanywst-mcp-opa-authz -- docker run --rm -i ghcr.io/kanywst/mcp-opa-authz:0.3.0
{
"$schema": "https://opencode.ai/config.json",
"mcp": {
"kanywst-mcp-opa-authz": {
"type": "local",
"command": [
"docker",
"run",
"--rm",
"-i",
"ghcr.io/kanywst/mcp-opa-authz:0.3.0"
],
"enabled": true
}
}
} mcp_servers:
kanywst-mcp-opa-authz:
command: "docker"
args: ["run", "--rm", "-i", "ghcr.io/kanywst/mcp-opa-authz:0.3.0"] {
"McpServers": {
"kanywst-mcp-opa-authz": {
"Transport": "stdio",
"Command": "docker",
"Arguments": [
"run",
"--rm",
"-i",
"ghcr.io/kanywst/mcp-opa-authz:0.3.0"
]
}
}
} {
"mcpServers": {
"kanywst-mcp-opa-authz": {
"command": "docker",
"args": [
"run",
"--rm",
"-i",
"ghcr.io/kanywst/mcp-opa-authz:0.3.0"
]
}
}
} 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.
- 19 Sept 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.
- 18 Sept 26 +3
- Stability: unverified → 0.23 ▲ functional
- 11 Sept 26 40
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 20 Sept 2026 · Analysed oci/ghcr.io/kanywst/mcp-opa-authz:0.3.0
Provenance No attestation
The registry publishes no build provenance for this version, so there is nothing to verify.
| Result | No attestation |
|---|---|
| Ecosystem | oci |
| Reason | No attestation published |
Background: How many MCP packages publish verified provenance →
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 →
authzen_discover ~118
Fetch a PDP's AuthZEN metadata document from /.well-known/authzen-configuration to find out which endpoints and capabilities it offers. Use this when a PDP URL is known but its evaluation endpoint is not, or to check whether a PDP supports batch evaluation before calling authzen_evaluate_batch.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| pdp_url | string | – | The PDP root, e.g. `https://pdp.example.com`. An evaluation endpoint URL is also accepted — the known AuthZEN path suffix is stripped. Defaults to the configured AUTHZEN_PDP_URL. |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| metadata | object | yes | – |
| metadata_url | string | yes | – |
No examples provided.
authzen_evaluate ~279
Ask an OpenID AuthZEN 1.0 Policy Decision Point whether a subject may perform an action on a resource. Use this when the answer has to come from the PDP that actually governs the system, rather than from a policy pasted into the conversation. Returns the PDP's decision and any context it attached.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| action | string | yes | JSON object naming the action. AuthZEN requires "name"; "properties" is optional. Example: {"name":"read"} |
| context | string | – | Optional JSON object of runtime context the policy may read — IP address, time of day, MFA strength. Example: {"ip":"10.0.0.7","mfa":"webauthn"} |
| pdp_url | string | – | Override the configured AUTHZEN_PDP_URL for this call. Must be an absolute http(s) URL to an Access Evaluation endpoint. |
| resource | string | yes | JSON object identifying the target. AuthZEN requires "type" and "id"; "properties" is optional. Example: {"type":"document","id":"doc-1","properties":{"classification":"secret"}} |
| subject | string | yes | JSON object identifying the principal. AuthZEN requires "type" and "id"; "properties" is optional. Example: {"type":"user","id":"alice","properties":{"department":"sales"}} |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| context | null|array | – | – |
| decision | boolean | yes | – |
| pdp_url | string | yes | – |
| request_id | string | yes | – |
No examples provided.
authzen_evaluate_batch ~328
Ask an OpenID AuthZEN 1.0 PDP for several decisions in one round trip (the Access Evaluations API). Use this to answer "which of these may the subject do" — filtering a list of resources, or checking every action on one resource — instead of calling authzen_evaluate in a loop. Top-level subject/action/resource/context act as defaults that each entry may override.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| action | string | – | Default JSON action for entries that omit one. Requires "name". |
| context | string | – | Default JSON context object for entries that omit one. |
| evaluations | string | yes | JSON array of evaluation objects. Each may carry its own "subject", "action", "resource" and "context"; anything omitted falls back to the top-level argument of the same name. Example: [{"resource":{… |
| evaluations_semantic | string | – | How the PDP should process the list. `execute_all` (default) evaluates every entry; `deny_on_first_deny` and `permit_on_first_permit` let the PDP stop early and return fewer decisions than there were… |
| pdp_url | string | – | Override the configured AUTHZEN_PDP_URL for this call. Must point at an Access Evaluations (plural) endpoint. |
| resource | string | – | Default JSON resource for entries that omit one. Requires "type" and "id". |
| subject | string | – | Default JSON subject for entries that omit one. Requires "type" and "id". |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| decisions | null|array | yes | – |
| evaluations_semantic | string | yes | – |
| pdp_url | string | yes | – |
| request_id | string | yes | – |
| truncated | boolean | yes | – |
No examples provided.
evaluate_policy ~292
Evaluate a Rego policy module against an input document and optional data namespace. Runs in-process via OPA; no external service is contacted, and the built-ins that could contact one are disabled. Use this to author or debug a policy whose source you have. Returns the decision, whether the query was defined at all, the raw OPA result set, and any print() output.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| data_json | string | – | JSON-encoded base document seeding the `data` namespace, for policies that read reference data. |
| input_json | string | – | JSON-encoded input document — the `input` variable inside the policy. |
| query | string | yes | Rego query to evaluate, e.g. `data.example.allow` or `data.example.violations[_]`. |
| rego | string | yes | Rego source for the policy module. Must include a `package` declaration. Rego v1 syntax by default: rule bodies need `if`, and multi-value rules need `contains`. |
| rego_version | string | – | Rego syntax version: `v1` (default) or `v0` for pre-OPA-1.0 policies written without `if`/`contains`. |
| trace | boolean | – | Return a pretty-printed evaluation trace. Use this to find out why a rule did not fire; it is verbose, so leave it off until a result is surprising. |
Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.
No examples provided.
What is the io.github.kanywst/mcp-opa-authz server?
io.github.kanywst/mcp-opa-authz is listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.kanywst/mcp-opa-authz. Authorization answers from real policy code: evaluate Rego locally, or ask an AuthZEN 1.0 PDP. This page covers its container image (ghcr.io/kanywst/mcp-opa-authz:0.3.0).
Is the io.github.kanywst/mcp-opa-authz server safe to use?
io.github.kanywst/mcp-opa-authz scores 44 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 io.github.kanywst/mcp-opa-authz server expose?
io.github.kanywst/mcp-opa-authz exposes 4 tools: authzen_discover, authzen_evaluate, authzen_evaluate_batch, evaluate_policy. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 1,017 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Is the io.github.kanywst/mcp-opa-authz server still maintained?
io.github.kanywst/mcp-opa-authz 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.
What licence is the io.github.kanywst/mcp-opa-authz server under?
io.github.kanywst/mcp-opa-authz declares the MIT licence, which is OSI-approved. That covers the source only, and says nothing about the cost of any service it calls.