SecHelix
PYPI · SECHELIX · SCANNED SEP 20
Evidence-first security review of authorized repositories. Read-only, root-confined, no shell.
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 Security50
- Malware scan not yet available for this package.Unverified
- No known CVEs affecting this package version or its production dependencies.Pass
- Runs hatchling.build at install time, a recognised native-build step with no shell scripting around it. View diagnostics → Pass
- No production dependencies, so there is no dependency health to assess. View diagnostics → Pass
Provenance & Transparency35
- 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
- License check failed: the license (Apache Software License) isn't a recognized OSI-approved license. See how to fix → Fail
- Actively maintained (last published 10 days ago).Pass
- Publishes a security disclosure policy (SECURITY.md).Pass
Schema Quality & AI Usability61
- AI-judged instruction clarity (fair).Partial
- Tool/resource definitions use about 226 tokens (~32/item across 7 items; 7 tools + 0 resources), lean.Pass
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management37
- Stability observed for 11 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
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 7 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 7 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 SecHelix MCP server?
SecHelix runs locally as a PyPI package, launched with uvx sechelix. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.
pypi · sechelix
claude mcp add omarmohelal-sechelix -- uvx sechelix
{
"mcpServers": {
"omarmohelal-sechelix": {
"command": "uvx",
"args": [
"sechelix"
]
}
}
} {
"servers": {
"omarmohelal-sechelix": {
"command": "uvx",
"args": [
"sechelix"
]
}
}
} codex mcp add omarmohelal-sechelix -- uvx sechelix
{
"$schema": "https://opencode.ai/config.json",
"mcp": {
"omarmohelal-sechelix": {
"type": "local",
"command": [
"uvx",
"sechelix"
],
"enabled": true
}
}
} openclaw mcp add omarmohelal-sechelix --command uvx --arg sechelix
mcp_servers:
omarmohelal-sechelix:
command: "uvx"
args: ["sechelix"] {
"McpServers": {
"omarmohelal-sechelix": {
"Transport": "stdio",
"Command": "uvx",
"Arguments": [
"sechelix"
]
}
}
} assistant mcp add omarmohelal-sechelix -t stdio -c uvx -a sechelix
{
"mcpServers": {
"omarmohelal-sechelix": {
"command": "uvx",
"args": [
"sechelix"
]
}
}
} 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 30 to 33. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 9 days of observed history at the previous scan, 10 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 17 Sept 26 +4
- Stability: unverified → 0.27 ▲ functional
- 10 Sept 26 −15
- Malware scan: pass → unverified ▼ security
- Security disclosure: unverified → pass ▲ functional
- 9 Sept 26 60
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 pypi/sechelix@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 | pypi |
Background: How many MCP packages publish verified provenance →
Install scripts 1 script
| Hook | Tier | Command |
|---|---|---|
| build_backend | allowlisted | hatchling.build |
Background: Why install scripts are a supply-chain risk →
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 →
sechelix_audit ~36
Run a STATIC SecHelix audit over a directory.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| depth | string | – | – |
| path | string | – | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
sechelix_coverage ~25
What previous runs did NOT examine.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | string | – | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
sechelix_doctor ~20
Report which SecHelix components are available.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
sechelix_findings ~39
Findings for a run, with why an empty list is empty.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | string | – | – |
| run_id | string | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
sechelix_report ~45
Render a run as markdown, json, sarif or html.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| format | string | – | – |
| path | string | – | – |
| run_id | string | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
sechelix_run_status ~35
Node statuses and integrity for a recorded run.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | string | – | – |
| run_id | string | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
sechelix_verify ~26
Build safe verification plans for a finding.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| finding_id | string | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
What is the SecHelix MCP server?
SecHelix is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.omarmohelal/sechelix. Evidence-first security review of authorized repositories. Read-only, root-confined, no shell. This page covers its PyPI package (sechelix).
Is the SecHelix MCP server safe to use?
SecHelix scores 50 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. We found no known CVEs affecting it as of 20 September 2026. 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 SecHelix MCP server expose?
SecHelix exposes 7 tools: sechelix_audit, sechelix_coverage, sechelix_doctor, sechelix_findings, sechelix_report, and 2 more. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 226 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Is the SecHelix MCP server still maintained?
SecHelix 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.