Grill
MCPB · GRILL.MCPB
A second opinion from an unrelated AI model before you commit to a decision.
Available components
Last scanned (2 hours ago)
Scores higher than 94% of MCPB servers
Category AI and Machine Learning
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
- No malware scan is available for this kind of package: the supply-chain vendors we use do not cover it. This is a permanent gap in our coverage, not a finding about the package.Unverified
- Known CVEs could not be checked: we found no dependency list to check in this bundle: either it runs a compiled binary, whose bundled manifests we do not read, or none of the package.json, requirements.txt, pyproject.toml or uv.lock files it ships for its runtime declares a dependency we can read (a requirements.txt that only points at a setup.py project, a local path, or a nested requirements file we cannot follow counts as none).Unverified
- Install-script risk not yet assessed.Unverified
- Dependency health could not be checked: we found no dependency list to check in this bundle: either it runs a compiled binary, whose bundled manifests we do not read, or none of the package.json, requirements.txt, pyproject.toml or uv.lock files it ships for its runtime declares a dependency we can read (a requirements.txt that only points at a setup.py project, a local path, or a nested requirements file we cannot follow counts as none).Unverified
Provenance & Transparency100
- Source repository is publicly reachable at the declared URL. View diagnostics → Pass
- Cryptographically verified build provenance (signed, bound to mtangoz/grill). View diagnostics → Pass
- Clear OSI-approved license (MIT).Pass
- Actively maintained (last published 21 days ago).Pass
- Publishes a security disclosure policy (SECURITY.md).Pass
Schema Quality & AI Usability73
- AI-judged instruction clarity (excellent).Pass
- Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 478 tokens (~239/item across 2 items; 2 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 Management70
- Stability observed for 21 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
Tool Safety75
- No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
- 0 of 1 tool(s) whose name or description implies an irreversible operation declare an MCP destructiveHint annotation; "grill" implies "send" and declares readOnlyHint instead, contradicting what its own name says it does. See how to fix → Fail
- 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
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.
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.
- 18 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.
- 16 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.
- 14 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.
- 12 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 43 to 50. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 13 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.
- 10 Oct 26 +3
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 23 to 43. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 7 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.
- 4 Oct 26 +3
- Stability: unverified → 0.23 ▲ functional
- 28 Sept 26 +10
- We updated how we score, so this day's move reflects our rubric, not a change to the server See what changed → functional
- 27 Sept 26 38
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 18 Oct 2026 · Analysed mcpb/https://github.com/mtangoz/grill/releases/download/v0.1.0/grill.mcpb@0.1.0
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 | mcpb |
| Reason | Verified |
| Discovered via | GitHub artifact attestations |
| Source repo | mtangoz/grill |
| Certificate issuer | https://token.actions.githubusercontent.com |
| Certificate SAN | https://github.com/mtangoz/grill/.github/workflows/release.yml@refs/heads/main |
| Rekor log index | 2969409847 |
| Predicate type | SLSA build provenance https://slsa.dev/provenance/v1 |
| Subject digest | sha256:de55a661493c44a2f476595ec5bc2e25aba78405f7e6f69b1b55e6665fa97b57 |
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 →
grill Grill a decision ~358
Send a decision, plan or forecast to an outside AI judge: a model from a different company than Claude. It writes the strongest case for and against, names the cheapest test that would settle each challenge, and gives a verdict (holds, holds-with-conditions, weak or refuted). Before calling: write the subject, meaning the decision, the options, the reasons, the prediction and confidence exactly as the user gave them, and the strongest case against. Show it to the user, and call only after they approve, because it leaves their machine for a model router (zero-data-retention endpoints only). The Jev quality check is ON: Jev, a decision model from TypeSafe, also sees the masked write-up and the report, on a zero-retention endpoint. Tell the user that before they approve, and that they can skip it for this grill (pass quality_check: false) or switch it off in Grill's settings. Costs about a cent on the user's own key and usually takes 1–3 minutes. If the result is a job id, call grill_result with it.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| author | string | – | Optional. The model family that wrote the subject, if not Claude, for example openai. That family is excluded from judging too. |
| quality_check | boolean | – | Optional. false skips the Jev quality check for this grill only, when the user asks. It never turns on a check the user switched off in settings. |
| question | string | – | Optional. One neutral question, at most 600 characters, that never names a preferred answer. For a forecast, ask whether the confidence is too high, too low or about right. |
| subject | string | yes | The approved challenge subject, in markdown. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
grill_result Collect a grill that was still running ~51
Collect the report of a grill that returned a job id. Waits up to 45 seconds; call again if it is still running.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| job_id | string | yes | The job id the grill tool returned. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the Grill MCP server?
Grill ships as an MCPB bundle, a single file you download and open in an MCP host that supports MCPB bundles, such as Claude Desktop. The host reads the launch command from the bundle's own manifest, so there is no command to copy. The MCP registry declares no SHA-256 for this bundle, so there is no published digest to check the download against.
mcpb · grill.mcpb
Download bundleThe MCP registry declares no SHA-256 for this bundle, so there is no published digest to check it against. Open it with an MCPB-capable host such as Claude Desktop.
What is the Grill MCP server?
Grill is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.mtangoz/grill. A second opinion from an unrelated AI model before you commit to a decision. This page covers its MCPB bundle (https://github.com/mtangoz/grill/releases/download/v0.1.0/grill.mcpb).
Is the Grill MCP server safe to use?
Grill scores 58 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. 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 Grill MCP server expose?
Grill exposes 2 tools: grill, grill_result. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 409 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
What licence is the Grill MCP server under?
Grill declares the MIT licence, which is OSI-approved. That covers the source only, and says nothing about the cost of any service it calls.