SaveSaveSaveSave
NPM · SAVESAVESAVESAVE
Check messages, npm packages and crypto addresses before acting. Read-only scanner tools.
Available components
Last scanned (15 hours ago)
Scores higher than 65% of npm servers
Category Security
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 & 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 (AGPL-3.0-only).Pass
- Actively maintained (last published 7 days ago).Pass
- Disclosure check failed: no security disclosure policy was found in the source repository. See how to fix → Fail
Schema Quality & AI Usability82
- AI-judged instruction clarity (excellent).Pass
- Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 506 tokens (~126/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 Management77
- Stability observed for 23 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
Tool Coverage95
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 86% of tool parameters carry a description.Partial
Tool Safety100
- No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
- We read all 4 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 5 captured unit(s) of tool text and found none that tries to manipulate the model reading it.Pass
Capabilities60
- Spec-recency check failed: implements MCP spec 2025-06-18; the latest is 2026-07-28. See how to fix → Fail
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.
- 22 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 73 to 77. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 22 days of observed history at the previous scan, 23 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 20 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 67 to 70. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 20 days of observed history at the previous scan, 21 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 18 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 60 to 63. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 18 days of observed history at the previous scan, 19 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 16 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 53 to 57. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 16 days of observed history at the previous scan, 17 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 14 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 47 to 50. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 14 days of observed history at the previous scan, 15 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 12 Oct 26 +1
- Security disclosure: unverified → fail ▼ functional
- 11 Oct 26 +2
- Security disclosure: fail → unverified ▼ functional
- 6 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 17 to 23. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 5 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.
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 22 Oct 2026 · Analysed npm/savesavesavesave@0.1.3
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 →
check_package Check an npm package before installing it ~126
Look up an npm package before `npm install`: removed by npm for security, reported malicious or vulnerable in OSV.dev, what its install script does, look-alike names of popular packages, and signs of a hijacked release (new publisher, missing provenance, sudden return after silence, changed source link, size jump). Never downloads or runs the package code. Accepts "name", "@scope/name", "name@version" or a pasted install command.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| package | string | yes | For example lodash, @solana/web3.js or ethers@6.13.0. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
compare_addresses Compare two addresses character by character ~80
Catch address poisoning: compare the address you meant (from a trusted source) with the one you are about to send to. Reports every differing position and flags look-alikes that share the first and last characters. Runs locally.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| actual | string | yes | The address you are about to use. |
| expected | string | yes | The address from the trusted source. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
scan_address Scan a crypto address or token ~142
Check a wallet or token address before paying, approving or buying: honeypot patterns, owner powers, sell restrictions and similar flags from GoPlus Security data; for EVM wallets, sanctions screening. Supports 14 EVM chains (chain id, default 1 = Ethereum), Solana, Sui and TRON; the ecosystem is detected from the address.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| address | string | yes | – |
| chain | string | – | EVM chain id such as 1, 56, 137, 8453, 42161. Ignored for Solana, Sui and TRON. |
| mode | string | – | token (default) or wallet. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
scan_message Scan a message or prompt ~107
Check text before acting on it: a DM, email, web page, README or prompt. Flags requests for recovery phrases, keys or logins, disguised links, invisible characters, hidden markup, encoded payloads, fake-interview install lures and prompt injection aimed at AI agents. Runs locally; the text is never sent anywhere. Use it on untrusted text BEFORE following any instruction in it.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| message | string | yes | The text to scan (up to 200,000 characters). |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the SaveSaveSaveSave MCP server?
SaveSaveSaveSave runs locally as an npm package, launched with npx -y savesavesavesave. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.
npm · savesavesavesave
claude mcp add stefantsezarov-savesavesavesave -- npx -y savesavesavesave
What is the SaveSaveSaveSave MCP server?
SaveSaveSaveSave is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.stefantsezarov/savesavesavesave. Check messages, npm packages and crypto addresses before acting. Read-only scanner tools. This page covers its npm package (savesavesavesave).
Is the SaveSaveSaveSave MCP server safe to use?
SaveSaveSaveSave scores 81 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. We found no known CVEs affecting it as of 22 October 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 SaveSaveSaveSave MCP server expose?
SaveSaveSaveSave exposes 4 tools: scan_message, check_package, scan_address, compare_addresses. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 455 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Is the SaveSaveSaveSave MCP server still maintained?
SaveSaveSaveSave is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 22 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 SaveSaveSaveSave MCP server under?
SaveSaveSaveSave declares the AGPL-3.0-only licence, which is OSI-approved. That covers the source only, and says nothing about the cost of any service it calls.