Second Read
PYPI · SECOND-READ
Reviews drafts: fact-checks claims against web sources and builds the strongest counter-case.
Available components
Last scanned (20 hours ago)
Scores higher than 64% of PyPI servers
Category Education and Research
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 build step with no custom scripting around it. View diagnostics → Pass
- 2 of 40 dependencies flagged as unhealthy. View diagnostics → Partial
Provenance & Transparency100
- Source repository is publicly reachable at the declared URL. View diagnostics → Pass
- Cryptographically verified build provenance (signed, bound to sbanthia92/second-read). View diagnostics → Pass
- 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 Usability67
- AI-judged instruction clarity (good).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 Management30
- Stability observed for 9 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 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 2 captured unit(s) of tool text and found none that tries to manipulate the model reading it.Pass
Capabilities100
- Implements a current MCP spec version (2026-07-28).Pass
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 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 23 to 27. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 7 days of observed history at the previous scan, 8 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 1 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 17 to 20. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 5 days of observed history at the previous scan, 6 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 30 Oct 26 −14
- Malware scan: pass → unverified ▼ security
- Security disclosure: fail → pass ▲ functional
- 29 Oct 26 +32
- Injection markers: unverified → pass ▲ security
- Tool coverage: unverified → 100 ▲ functional
- Stability: unverified → 0.10 ▲ functional
- MCP protocol: unverified → pass ▲ functional
- Package version: 0.1.3 → 0.1.4 functional
- 28 Oct 26 −30
- Tool safety: pass → unverified ▼ security
- Malware scan: pass → unverified ▼ security
- Stability: Stability not yet verified: we do not have a sandbox capture of the MCP schema this version of the package serves yet. security
- Capabilities: pass → unverified ▼ functional
- Tool coverage: 100 → unverified ▼ functional
- First check of Schema quality: unverified functional
- Package version: 0.1.3 → 0.1.4 functional
- 27 Oct 26 +15
- Malware scan: unverified → pass ▲ security
- 26 Oct 26 64
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 4 Nov 2026 · Analysed pypi/second-read@0.1.4
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 | pypi |
| Reason | Verified |
| Discovered via | Registry attestation endpoint |
| Source repo | sbanthia92/second-read |
| Certificate issuer | https://token.actions.githubusercontent.com |
| Certificate SAN | https://github.com/sbanthia92/second-read/.github/workflows/publish.yml@refs/tags/v0.1.4 |
| Rekor log index | 3549527378 |
| Predicate type | PyPI publish attestation https://docs.pypi.org/attestations/publish/v1 |
| Subject digest | sha256:becaf05bd3351f0c7696fb062e19737ef9ffbd3c88eb0b5137546f94c7294f18 |
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 40 packages
| Packages resolved | 40 |
|---|---|
| Stale | 1 |
| No linked repository | 1 |
| 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 →
review_document ~192
Review a document draft with a desk of specialist agents: a fact-checker that cites sources, a devil's advocate that builds the strongest counter-case, a structure reviewer, a copy editor and an originality check. Returns a markdown report (must fix, counter-case, should fix, polish, originality notes, claim ledger). Pass exactly one of `content` (the text or markdown) or `url` (a public page). Reviews take a few minutes.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| content | – | – | The document text or markdown. Give this or `url`, not both. |
| focus | – | – | Optional steer, e.g. "check the financial figures". |
| profile | string | – | `auto` (detect), `opinion` (essays, op-eds, posts) or `design_doc` (technical designs and proposals). |
| url | – | – | A public http(s) page to fetch and review, instead of `content`. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the Second Read MCP server?
Second Read runs locally as a PyPI package, launched with uvx second-read. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.
pypi · second-read
claude mcp add sbanthia92-second-read -- uvx second-read
What is the Second Read MCP server?
Second Read is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.sbanthia92/second-read. Reviews drafts: fact-checks claims against web sources and builds the strongest counter-case. This page covers its PyPI package (second-read).
Is the Second Read MCP server safe to use?
Second Read scores 69 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. We found no known CVEs affecting it as of 4 November 2026. 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 Second Read MCP server expose?
Second Read exposes 1 tool: review_document. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 192 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Is the Second Read MCP server still maintained?
Second Read is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 4 November 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 Second Read MCP server under?
Second Read declares the MIT licence, which is OSI-approved. That covers the source only, and says nothing about the cost of any service it calls.