io.github.rbsoftwaresystems/draftlytic-mcp
NPM · DRAFTLYTIC-MCP · SCANNED AUG 3
Offline MCP server for planning structured project specs — validate, render, and checklist tools.
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 →
Supply Chain Security86
- No malware found by supply-chain analysis.Pass
- Only part of the dependency tree could be resolved (94 of 98), so this covers what we could see, not the whole tree.Partial
- No install/post-install scripts declared.Pass
- Only part of the dependency tree could be resolved (94 of 98), so this covers what we could see, not the whole tree. View diagnostics → Partial
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 25 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
- 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
- Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 960 tokens (~240/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 Management23
- Stability observed for 7 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
Capabilities100
- Implements a supported MCP spec version (2025-11-25); the latest is 2026-07-28.Pass
Add this component to your MCP client. Where a client-specific snippet is available, pick your client below and copy it straight into your config; otherwise use the connection detail shown.
npm · draftlytic-mcp
claude mcp add rbsoftwaresystems-draftlytic-mcp -- npx -y draftlytic-mcp
codex mcp add rbsoftwaresystems-draftlytic-mcp -- npx -y draftlytic-mcp
{
"$schema": "https://opencode.ai/config.json",
"mcp": {
"rbsoftwaresystems-draftlytic-mcp": {
"type": "local",
"command": [
"npx",
"-y",
"draftlytic-mcp"
],
"enabled": true
}
}
} openclaw mcp add rbsoftwaresystems-draftlytic-mcp --command npx --arg -y --arg draftlytic-mcp
mcp_servers:
rbsoftwaresystems-draftlytic-mcp:
command: "npx"
args: ["-y", "draftlytic-mcp"] {
"mcpServers": {
"rbsoftwaresystems-draftlytic-mcp": {
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"-y",
"draftlytic-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.
- 3 Aug 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.
- 2 Aug 26 +44
- Provenance: unverified → fail ▼ security
- Install scripts: unverified → pass ▲ security
- Known CVEs: unverified → partial ▲ security
- Malware scan: unverified → pass ▲ security
- Schema quality: unverified → excellent ▲ functional
- Dependency health: unverified → partial ▲ functional
- Stability: unverified → 0.20 ▲ functional
- Maintenance: unverified → pass ▲ functional
- MCP protocol: unverified → pass ▲ functional
- License: unverified → pass ▲ functional
- Licence: MIT functional
- 1 Aug 26 −9
- We updated how we score, so this day's move reflects our rubric, not a change to the server See what changed → functional
- 31 Jul 26 −18
- Malware scan: pass → unverified ▼ security
- 27 Jul 26 51
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 3 Aug 2026 · Analysed npm/[email protected]
Provenance none
Ecosystem: npm · Outcome: none
Dependencies 94 packages
94 packages in the resolved dependency tree · 94 deprecated · 29 stale.
The dependency tree was only partially resolved, so these counts may be incomplete.
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.
open_in_draftlytic Open in Draftlytic ~167
Build a link that opens this idea in the full Draftlytic app (free account, no card), which runs its own guided flow: AI-tailored questions, full project generation, an editable structured spec, and PRD export (plus scan-for-gaps, logo drafts, and GitHub push on paid plans). Pass either the spec drafted here (it gets compressed into a starting brief) or a plain-text idea. Show the returned URL to the user as a clickable link — this tool only builds it; nothing is sent anywhere.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| idea | string | — | Plain-text idea to hand off when there is no spec yet. |
| spec | object | — | A spec object (may be partial) to compress into the handoff brief. Takes precedence over `idea`. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
render_prd Render PRD ~194
Render a project spec into a deterministic, Draftlytic-style Markdown PRD. A project spec: name, overview, target_audience, platforms[], tech_stack[], features[] ({title, description, priority: must-have|nice-to-have|future, acceptance_criteria?[]}), screens[]? ({name, purpose}), data_model[]? ({entity, fields[]: {name, type, notes?}}), constraints[]?, non_goals[]?, revenue_model?. Output includes: title, overview, target audience, platforms, tech stack, features grouped by priority (must-have / nice-to-have / future) with acceptance-criteria checklists, screens & navigation, data model tables, constraints, and non-goals. Run validate_spec first — this tool renders whatever it's given, even an incomplete spec.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| spec | object | yes | The spec object to render, as a JSON value (not a JSON string). |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
spec_checklist Spec planning checklist ~171
Return a planning checklist grouped by category (platform, tech stack, target audience, features, competitors, revenue, constraints, data model, notifications, external services, design & UX), each with 2-4 concrete questions. Use this to interview the user before drafting a spec — you don't need to ask every question, just enough per category to fill in the schema meaningfully. Each question is an object: `prompt` is the question text; when it also has `options` (a short list of suggested answers), present it as a selectable choice question rather than asking the user to type — with `multiSelect: true`, let them pick several. Always leave a free-text escape so the user can answer in their own words; questions with no `options` are open-ended and stay free-text.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
validate_spec Validate spec ~190
Validate a project spec against the schema and return structured issues. A project spec: name, overview, target_audience, platforms[], tech_stack[], features[] ({title, description, priority: must-have|nice-to-have|future, acceptance_criteria?[]}), screens[]? ({name, purpose}), data_model[]? ({entity, fields[]: {name, type, notes?}}), constraints[]?, non_goals[]?, revenue_model?. Checks for missing/empty required sections, placeholder text (e.g. "TBD", "lorem ipsum", "fixme"), and features without a priority — all reported as errors. Also returns non-blocking quality hints, e.g. "none of your must-have features have acceptance_criteria" or "no non_goals listed".
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| spec | object | yes | The spec object to validate, as a JSON value (not a JSON string). |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.