Skip to content
verify mcp Beta VerifyMCP is currently in beta. If you notice any issues, get in touch and we’ll put it right.

io.github.sinhaKAN-ra/anumana

PYPI · ANUMANA-MCP

Predict query cost, explain the plan, and rewrite it before you run it — 12 DB engines.

Available components

+43 this week 68 Trust /100

Last scanned (20 hours ago)

Scores higher than 69% of PyPI servers

Category Databases

Trust breakdown (7 categories)

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
  • Runs hatchling.build at install time, a recognised build step with no custom scripting around it. View diagnostics → Pass
  • 0 of 30 dependencies flagged as unhealthy. 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 10 days ago).Pass
  • Publishes a security disclosure policy (SECURITY.md).Pass
Schema Quality & AI Usability73
  • AI-judged instruction clarity (excellent).Pass
  • Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 1203 tokens (~133/item across 9 items; 9 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 Management0
  • Stability not yet verified: not enough scan history yet (needs a 30-day window).Unverified
Tool Coverage71
  • 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
  • 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 9 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
  • An AI judge read all 9 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

Unverified: 1 category

A category scored 0 because we could not verify it: a data source with nothing on this package, evidence we could not reach, or a check we could not run. We only credit what we can confirm.

Changelog

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.

  • 15 Oct 26 +28
    • Injection markers: unverified → pass ▲ security
    • First check of Judged manipulation: pass security
    • Stability: Stability not yet verified: not enough scan history yet (needs a 30-day window). security
    • Tool coverage: unverified → 100 ▲ functional
    • MCP protocol: unverified → pass ▲ functional
    • First check of Tool coverage: 0 functional
    • First check of Schema quality: fail functional
    • First check of Schema quality: excellent functional
    • First check of Destructive annotations: pass functional
    • First check of Schema quality: fail functional
    • First check of Tool coverage: 100 functional
  • 13 Oct 26 +1
    • Provenance: unverified → fail ▼ security
    • Security disclosure: unverified → pass ▲ functional
  • 12 Oct 26 +14
    • Provenance: fail → unverified ▼ security
    • Malware scan: unverified → pass ▲ security
    • Security disclosure: pass → unverified ▼ functional
  • 6 Oct 26 25

    First indexed and scored.

Diagnostics

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 16 Oct 2026 · Analysed pypi/anumana-mcp@0.2.1

Provenance No attestation

The registry publishes no build provenance for this version, so there is nothing to verify.

Result No attestation
Ecosystem pypi
Reason No attestation published

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 30 packages
Packages resolved 30
Tree resolution Complete

Background: SBOMs and build attestations, explained →

MCP tools · 9 exposed · ~1,203 tokens

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 →

Tool Tokens
describe_schema_tool ~149

Read a database's REAL schema — tables/collections, columns/fields, INDEXES, and row counts — so you can write a grounded, cost-aware query BEFORE guessing. Call this FIRST when a user asks for data and you don't already know the schema; it tells you which columns are indexed so your query hits an index, not a full scan. READ-ONLY catalog access — never reads data rows. If the schema can't be read it returns `need_from_user` naming what to ask the user for. Pass target=<name> in a multi-DB setup; combine with list_targets to find which DB has the data.

NameTypeReqDescription
targetstring––
NameTypeReqDescription
resultstringyes–

No examples provided.

explain_query_working ~123

Explain in plain English HOW a query behaves — two layers: (1) the logical gather order (FROM -> WHERE -> GROUP BY -> HAVING -> SELECT -> ORDER BY -> LIMIT), why 'LIMIT 10' can still be slow; and (2) the actual physical plan the engine chose for THIS query, bottom-up. Call when a user asks why a query is slow or how it runs. Teaching tool. Pass target=<name> in a multi-DB setup.

NameTypeReqDescription
sqlstringyes–
targetstring––
NameTypeReqDescription
resultstringyes–

No examples provided.

list_policies ~103

List the operator's standing enforcement policies — the rules that can BLOCK or WARN on a query regardless of what you intend. Each has a name, scope (which target/engine), condition (risk tier and/or flag), and action (block/warn/allow). preflight_query and suggest_query already apply these and attach the verdict; call this to explain to a user WHY a query was blocked. No policies configured means open by default (nothing blocked).

Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.

NameTypeReqDescription
resultstringyes–

No examples provided.

list_targets ~92

List the databases Anumana is configured to analyse — each with its name, engine, and whether it's diagnosable. Call this FIRST in a multi-DB setup to see which target holds the data the user asked for, then pass target=<name> to the other tools. In a single-DB setup you can omit target and the one database is used. Never returns connection strings or secrets.

Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.

NameTypeReqDescription
resultstringyes–

No examples provided.

preflight_query ~146

Before running ANY SQL query you (the agent) just wrote, check how costly it will be on the real schema — WITHOUT executing it. Returns a risk tier (cheap/moderate/expensive/dangerous), rows scanned vs returned, scan strategy, and overhead flags (missing index, SELECT *, no LIMIT, N+1 / nested-loop blowup). EXPLAIN only — never runs the query. In a multi-DB setup pass target=<name> (see list_targets). For similarity search use preflight_vector_search; with no DB use preflight_schema_only.

NameTypeReqDescription
sqlstringyes–
targetstring––
NameTypeReqDescription
resultstringyes–

No examples provided.

preflight_schema_only ~105

Analyse a query against pasted CREATE TABLE DDL with NO database connection — the zero-trust, offline front door. Call when the user gave you their schema (DDL) but not DB credentials. Catches SELECT *, missing LIMIT, un-indexed filter columns, LIKE '%...', functions on filtered columns. HEURISTIC only (no live counts) and says so. No target needed.

NameTypeReqDescription
ddlstringyes–
sqlstringyes–
NameTypeReqDescription
resultstringyes–

No examples provided.

preflight_vector_search ~177

Before running a VECTOR SIMILARITY SEARCH (pgvector: `ORDER BY embedding <-> $1 LIMIT k`, cosine `<=>`, inner-product `<#>`), check its cost WITHOUT running it — for any RAG / semantic-search / nearest-neighbour query you generate. Catches the vector traps a plain SQL check misses: brute-force scan with no HNSW/IVFFlat index (FULL_VECTOR_SCAN), top_k too large (TOP_K_TOO_LARGE), unbounded search (UNBOUNDED_VECTOR_SEARCH), and metadata- filter/ANN recall loss (VECTOR_FILTER_INTERACTION). EXPLAIN only. Pass target=<name> in a multi-DB setup; the target should be a pgvector engine.

NameTypeReqDescription
sqlstringyes–
targetstring––
NameTypeReqDescription
resultstringyes–

No examples provided.

rewrite_query ~127

Rewrite a slow query into a cheaper, equivalent one and PROVE the improvement by EXPLAIN-ing both and comparing planner cost. Call after a preflight flags a query expensive/dangerous. Returns the rewritten query, what changed, before/after cost, and index suggestions — ONLY suggesting a btree index when the filter is selective enough to help (an HNSW index for a vector target). Includes equivalence caveats. Pass target=<name> in a multi-DB setup.

NameTypeReqDescription
sqlstringyes–
targetstring––
NameTypeReqDescription
resultstringyes–

No examples provided.

suggest_query ~181

Grade a query you (the agent) wrote for a user's data request and get told whether to RUN it or REFINE it — the check step of generate->check-> refine. Workflow: (1) describe_schema_tool to learn columns + indexes, (2) write a candidate for the user's intent, (3) call this. Returns `next_action`: 'accept' (cheap/moderate — run it) or 'refine' (expensive/ dangerous — here are the high-severity flags + a VERIFIED cheaper rewrite; fix and call again). You write the SQL; Anumana owns cost truth. Bound your loop to ~3 rounds. Pass target=<name> in a multi-DB setup.

NameTypeReqDescription
candidate_sqlstringyes–
intentstringyes–
targetstring––
NameTypeReqDescription
resultstringyes–

No examples provided.

Install

How do I install the io.github.sinhaKAN-ra/anumana MCP server?

io.github.sinhaKAN-ra/anumana runs locally as a PyPI package, launched with uvx anumana-mcp. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.

pypi · anumana-mcp

# add to Claude Code
claude mcp add sinhakan-ra-anumana -- uvx anumana-mcp
Common questions

What is the io.github.sinhaKAN-ra/anumana MCP server?

io.github.sinhaKAN-ra/anumana is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.sinhaKAN-ra/anumana. Predict query cost, explain the plan, and rewrite it before you run it, 12 DB engines. This page covers its PyPI package (anumana-mcp).

Is the io.github.sinhaKAN-ra/anumana MCP server safe to use?

io.github.sinhaKAN-ra/anumana scores 68 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. We found no known CVEs affecting it as of 16 October 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 io.github.sinhaKAN-ra/anumana MCP server expose?

io.github.sinhaKAN-ra/anumana exposes 9 tools: list_targets, list_policies, preflight_query, preflight_vector_search, rewrite_query, and 4 more. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 1,203 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.

Is the io.github.sinhaKAN-ra/anumana MCP server still maintained?

io.github.sinhaKAN-ra/anumana is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 16 October 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 io.github.sinhaKAN-ra/anumana MCP server under?

io.github.sinhaKAN-ra/anumana declares the MIT licence, which is OSI-approved. That covers the source only, and says nothing about the cost of any service it calls.