Utuh watcher
NPM · UTUH-MCP · SCANNED SEP 20
Sweep bonded completeness claims on Creditcoin against Ethereum, and refute one that omits an event.
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 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 & 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 6 days ago).Pass
- Publishes a security disclosure policy (SECURITY.md).Pass
Schema Quality & AI Usability85
- 100% of prompts and resources have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the item's name).Pass
- AI-judged instruction clarity (excellent).Pass
- Tool/resource definitions use about 833 tokens (~104/item across 8 items; 5 tools + 3 resources), lean.Pass
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management43
- Stability observed for 13 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
Tool Coverage93
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 75% of tool parameters carry a description.Partial
- 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 5 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
Capabilities100
- Implements a supported MCP spec version (2025-11-25); the latest is 2026-07-28.Pass
How do I install the Utuh watcher MCP server?
Utuh watcher runs locally as an npm package, launched with npx -y utuh-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 · utuh-mcp
claude mcp add pugarhuda-utuh-mcp -- npx -y utuh-mcp
{
"mcpServers": {
"pugarhuda-utuh-mcp": {
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"-y",
"utuh-mcp"
]
}
}
} {
"servers": {
"pugarhuda-utuh-mcp": {
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"-y",
"utuh-mcp"
]
}
}
} codex mcp add pugarhuda-utuh-mcp -- npx -y utuh-mcp
{
"$schema": "https://opencode.ai/config.json",
"mcp": {
"pugarhuda-utuh-mcp": {
"type": "local",
"command": [
"npx",
"-y",
"utuh-mcp"
],
"enabled": true
}
}
} openclaw mcp add pugarhuda-utuh-mcp --command npx --arg -y --arg utuh-mcp
mcp_servers:
pugarhuda-utuh-mcp:
command: "npx"
args: ["-y", "utuh-mcp"] {
"McpServers": {
"pugarhuda-utuh-mcp": {
"Transport": "stdio",
"Command": "npx",
"Arguments": [
"-y",
"utuh-mcp"
]
}
}
} assistant mcp add pugarhuda-utuh-mcp -t stdio -c npx -a -y utuh-mcp
{
"mcpServers": {
"pugarhuda-utuh-mcp": {
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"-y",
"utuh-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.
- 18 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 33 to 37. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 10 days of observed history at the previous scan, 11 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 16 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 27 to 30. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 8 days of observed history at the previous scan, 9 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 15 Sept 26 +15
- Malware scan: unverified → pass ▲ security
- 14 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 20 to 23. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 6 days of observed history at the previous scan, 7 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 13 Sept 26 −12
- Malware scan: pass → unverified ▼ security
- Schema quality: 79 → 104 ▼ functional
- Tool coverage: 67% → 75% ▲ functional
- Stability: unverified → 0.20 ▲ functional
- First check of Tool coverage: 100 functional
- Schema quality: good → excellent functional
- Package version: 0.3.0 → 0.4.0 functional
- 8 Sept 26 +15
- Malware scan: unverified → pass ▲ security
- 7 Sept 26 57
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 npm/utuh-mcp@0.4.0
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 →
audit_attestors Audit Creditcoin's attestors ~99
Ask both Creditcoin networks (CC3 Testnet and Creditcoin Mainnet) what header hashes their attestors signed for recent Ethereum blocks, then check each three ways: against independent Ethereum endpoints, against that network's own ChainInfo digest index, and against the other network. A MISMATCH would mean attestors signed a block Ethereum does not have; NOT ON CHAIN would mean the indexer published an attestation the chain does not hold.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| crossNetwork | object | yes | – |
| networks | array | yes | – |
No examples provided.
list_claims List claims ~153
A page of claims on a deployment, by id, each with its status, member count, bond, and — for sealed ones — how many Creditcoin blocks remain in the challenge window. Sealed claims inside their window are the ones a watcher can still act on. Pass the returned nextCursor to get the next page; utuh://claims/{deployment} is the same list in one read.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| cursor | string | – | The nextCursor of the previous page; omit for the first |
| deployment | string | yes | Which deployment: "sepolia" is the completed loop, "mainnet" underwrites real Aave history |
| limit | integer | – | Claims per page, 1..100 |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| claims | array | yes | – |
| deployment | string | yes | Which deployment: "sepolia" is the completed loop, "mainnet" underwrites real Aave history |
| head | integer | yes | The Creditcoin block the windows were measured against |
| nextCursor | string|null | yes | null on the last page |
| registry | string | yes | – |
| total | integer | yes | Claims on the deployment |
No examples provided.
refute_claim Refute an incomplete claim ~136
Prove one omitted in-scope event through the Block Prover precompile and break the claim. Sends a real transaction on Creditcoin CC3 Testnet and pays the caller half the bond. Requires PRIVATE_KEY in the environment with a little CTC for gas. Answers with sent: false and a reason whenever it did not send.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| claimId | integer | yes | – |
| confirm | boolean | – | Must be true. This sends an irreversible transaction that slashes a real bond. |
| deployment | string | yes | Which deployment: "sepolia" is the completed loop, "mainnet" underwrites real Aave history |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| claimId | integer | yes | – |
| deployment | string | yes | Which deployment: "sepolia" is the completed loop, "mainnet" underwrites real Aave history |
| omitted | – | yes | The event proven, or that would have been |
| reason | string|null | yes | Why nothing was sent; null when it was |
| refuter | string|null | yes | The address paid |
| rewardCTC | string|null | yes | – |
| sent | boolean | yes | – |
| txHash | string|null | yes | – |
No examples provided.
sweep_claim Sweep a claim for completeness ~137
Sweep the source chain across independent endpoints for every in-scope event in a claim's range, take the union, and check each event against the claim on-chain. Needs no key and spends nothing. Reports complete with provenance, or the omitted event — which refute_claim can then prove, if the claim is still inside its window. Finalized and refuted claims can be swept too, for the record; open ones are still being built and cannot.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| claimId | integer | yes | – |
| deployment | string | yes | Which deployment: "sepolia" is the completed loop, "mainnet" underwrites real Aave history |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| bondCTC | string | yes | – |
| claimId | integer | yes | – |
| complete | boolean | yes | Every swept event is in the claim — as far as these endpoints saw |
| deployment | string | yes | Which deployment: "sepolia" is the completed loop, "mainnet" underwrites real Aave history |
| omitted | – | yes | The first in-scope event the claim does not contain |
| provenance | object | yes | – |
| refutable | boolean | yes | – |
| status | string | yes | – |
No examples provided.
tally What the registries have done ~44
The four numbers across both deployments: events proven into claims, claims sealed, claims broken by a refutation, and bond slashed. Read live from Creditcoin CC3 Testnet.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| bondSlashedCTC | string | yes | – |
| claimsRefuted | integer | yes | – |
| claimsSealed | integer | yes | – |
| eventsProvenIntoClaims | integer | yes | – |
No examples provided.
What is the Utuh watcher MCP server?
Utuh watcher is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.PugarHuda/utuh-mcp. Sweep bonded completeness claims on Creditcoin against Ethereum, and refute one that omits an event. This page covers its npm package (utuh-mcp).
Is the Utuh watcher MCP server safe to use?
Utuh watcher scores 78 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 Utuh watcher MCP server expose?
Utuh watcher exposes 5 tools: tally, list_claims, sweep_claim, refute_claim, audit_attestors. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 569 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Is the Utuh watcher MCP server still maintained?
Utuh watcher 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 Utuh watcher MCP server under?
Utuh watcher declares the MIT licence, which is OSI-approved. That covers the source only, and says nothing about the cost of any service it calls.