URL Safety Validator MCP
NPM · URL-SAFETY-VALIDATOR-MCP · 2 COMPONENTS · SCANNED SEP 20
AI URL safety validator: SAFE/SUSPICIOUS/DANGEROUS verdict, trust score, threat intel.
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 & Transparency45
- 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 12 days ago).Pass
- Disclosure check failed: no security disclosure policy was found in the source repository. See how to fix → Fail
Schema Quality & AI Usability77
- AI-judged instruction clarity (excellent).Pass
- Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 252 tokens (~252/item across 1 items; 1 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 Management93
- Stability observed for 28 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 1 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 1 captured unit(s) of tool text and found none that tries to manipulate the model reading it.Pass
Capabilities20
- Spec-recency check failed: implements MCP spec 2024-11-05; the latest is 2026-07-28. See how to fix → Fail
How do I install the URL Safety Validator MCP server?
URL Safety Validator MCP runs locally as an npm package, launched with npx -y url-safety-validator-mcp. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.
npm · url-safety-validator-mcp
claude mcp add ojaskord-url-safety-validator-mcp -- npx -y url-safety-validator-mcp
{
"mcpServers": {
"ojaskord-url-safety-validator-mcp": {
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"-y",
"url-safety-validator-mcp"
]
}
}
} {
"servers": {
"ojaskord-url-safety-validator-mcp": {
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"-y",
"url-safety-validator-mcp"
]
}
}
} codex mcp add ojaskord-url-safety-validator-mcp -- npx -y url-safety-validator-mcp
{
"$schema": "https://opencode.ai/config.json",
"mcp": {
"ojaskord-url-safety-validator-mcp": {
"type": "local",
"command": [
"npx",
"-y",
"url-safety-validator-mcp"
],
"enabled": true
}
}
} openclaw mcp add ojaskord-url-safety-validator-mcp --command npx --arg -y --arg url-safety-validator-mcp
mcp_servers:
ojaskord-url-safety-validator-mcp:
command: "npx"
args: ["-y", "url-safety-validator-mcp"] {
"McpServers": {
"ojaskord-url-safety-validator-mcp": {
"Transport": "stdio",
"Command": "npx",
"Arguments": [
"-y",
"url-safety-validator-mcp"
]
}
}
} assistant mcp add ojaskord-url-safety-validator-mcp -t stdio -c npx -a -y url-safety-validator-mcp
{
"mcpServers": {
"ojaskord-url-safety-validator-mcp": {
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"-y",
"url-safety-validator-mcp"
]
}
}
} 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.
- 20 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 90 to 93. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 27 days of observed history at the previous scan, 28 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 18 Sept 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.
- 17 Sept 26 −3
- Stability: pass → 0.83 functional
- 16 Sept 26 +1
- Stability: 0.97 → pass security
- 14 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 90 to 93. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 27 days of observed history at the previous scan, 28 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 12 Sept 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.
- 10 Sept 26 −3
- Stability: pass → 0.80 functional
- 9 Sept 26 +1
- Stability: 0.97 → pass security
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 npm/url-safety-validator-mcp@1.2.27
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_url ~252
Checks a URL for phishing, malware, typosquatting, and redirect threats. Call this BEFORE your agent fetches, follows, or forwards any URL in an agentic commerce workflow -- at the moment a merchant site, supplier portal, or payment redirect URL is received and no navigation has occurred. Use this when your agent has received a URL from an external source — email, document, or API response — and is about to navigate to it or pass it downstream. Checks live against Google Web Risk (webrisk.googleapis.com) and Google Safe Browsing (safebrowsing.googleapis.com). Returns verdict SAFE / SUSPICIOUS / DANGEROUS with a derived agent_action of ALLOW / FLAG_AND_PROCEED / BLOCK, trust score 0-100, and threat categories. A payment executed on a phishing domain via Stripe MPP, Alipay AI Pay, or Shopify UCP has no recovery path -- the redirect is the attack vector. A DANGEROUS verdict means halt immediately. Returns machine-ready verdict, no further analysis needed.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | string | yes | The URL to check. Full URL preferred (e.g. https://example.com/path). Bare domains also accepted. |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| _disclaimer | string | yes | – |
| agent_action | string | yes | Derived directly from verdict |
| ai_confidence | string|null | – | – |
| analysis_type | string | – | – |
| checked_at | string | yes | – |
| database_signals | object | – | – |
| domain_age_days | number|null | – | – |
| domain_registered | string|null | – | – |
| escalation_path | string | – | Present only when verdict is SUSPICIOUS |
| hold_reason | string | – | Present only when verdict is SUSPICIOUS |
| hostname | string | yes | – |
| reasoning | string | – | – |
| redirect_chain_detected | boolean | – | – |
| retry_after | number|null | – | – |
| source_url | string | – | – |
| ssl_valid | boolean | – | – |
| threat_categories | array | – | – |
| trust_score | number | yes | – |
| url | string | yes | – |
| verdict | string | yes | – |
No examples provided.
What is the URL Safety Validator MCP server?
URL Safety Validator MCP is listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.OjasKord/url-safety-validator-mcp. AI URL safety validator: SAFE/SUSPICIOUS/DANGEROUS verdict, trust score, threat intel. This page covers its npm package (url-safety-validator-mcp).
Is the URL Safety Validator MCP server safe to use?
URL Safety Validator MCP scores 81 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. We found no known CVEs affecting it as of 20 September 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 URL Safety Validator MCP server expose?
URL Safety Validator MCP exposes 1 tool: check_url. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 252 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Is the URL Safety Validator MCP server still maintained?
URL Safety Validator MCP 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 URL Safety Validator MCP server under?
URL Safety Validator MCP declares the MIT licence, which is OSI-approved. That covers the source only, and says nothing about the cost of any service it calls.