FSharp.Refactor
NUGET · FSHARP-REFACTOR
Offline analyzers that find and fix intent-hiding, slow or noisy F#, including agent-written code.
Available components
Last scanned (43 minutes ago)
Scores higher than 51% of NuGet servers
Category Developer Tools
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
- Build provenance not yet verified. View diagnostics → Unverified
- Clear OSI-approved license (Unlicense).Pass
- Actively maintained (last published 19 days ago).Pass
- Disclosure check failed: no security disclosure policy was found in the source repository. See how to fix → Fail
Schema Quality & AI Usability64
- AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
- Tool/resource definitions use about 180 tokens (~90/item across 2 items; 2 tools + 0 resources), lean.Pass
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management70
- Stability observed for 21 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 2 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
Capabilities20
- Spec-recency check failed: implements MCP spec 2024-11-05; 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.
- 4 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 63 to 67. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 19 days of observed history at the previous scan, 20 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 2 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 57 to 60. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 17 days of observed history at the previous scan, 18 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 31 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 50 to 53. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 15 days of observed history at the previous scan, 16 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 29 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 43 to 47. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 13 days of observed history at the previous scan, 14 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 26 Oct 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.
- 24 Oct 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.
- 22 Oct 26 +4
- Stability: unverified → 0.23 ▲ functional
- 15 Oct 26 +26
- 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
- MCP protocol: unverified → fail ▼ functional
- Tool coverage: unverified → 100 ▲ functional
- First check of Schema quality: fail functional
- First check of Destructive annotations: pass functional
- First check of Schema quality: pass functional
- First check of Schema quality: good functional
- First check of Tool coverage: 100 functional
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 5 Nov 2026 · Analysed nuget/fsharp-refactor@0.8.45
Provenance Inconclusive
We could not complete the check, so nothing is claimed either way. This is a gap on our side, not a finding about the package.
| Result | Inconclusive |
|---|---|
| Ecosystem | nuget |
| Reason | Signature present, unverified |
Signer
| Signed as | Repository signature, names nuget.org |
|---|---|
| Subject | CN=NuGet.org Repository by Microsoft,O=NuGet.org Repository by Microsoft,L=Redmond,ST=Washington,C=US |
| Issuer | CN=DigiCert Trusted G4 Code Signing RSA4096 SHA384 2021 CA1,O=DigiCert\, Inc.,C=US |
| Valid from | 23 Feb 2024 |
| Valid until | 18 May 2027 |
| Service index | https://api.nuget.org/v3/index.json |
| Owners | Thorium |
Background: How many MCP packages publish verified provenance →
Dependencies 0 packages
| Packages resolved | 0 |
|---|---|
| Tree resolution | Complete |
Background: SBOMs and build attestations, explained →
Registry declarations For information only
What the registry and the package's own manifest say about this version. The publisher or the registry writes these, nothing here is verified, and none of it affects the score.
| Repository | https://github.com/Thorium/fsharp-refactor |
|---|---|
| Repository type | git |
| Commit | 37637e8725601565b6b1b1db33c83777716fadf9 |
| Project URL | https://github.com/Thorium/fsharp-refactor |
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 →
analyze ~160
Analyze an F# project, script or directory with fsharp-refactor. Dry-run by default: reports findings without editing. Set apply=true to write the fixes (build-verified). Returns findings as JSON with stable fingerprints and source snippets.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| apply | boolean | – | write the fixes (default: dry-run) |
| categories | string | – | comma-separated: correctness,performance,idiom,cosmetic |
| codes | string | – | comma-separated rule codes to restrict to |
| defines | string | – | preprocessor symbols to define, ;-separated (like --define) |
| parseOnly | boolean | – | no MSBuild, syntactic rules only |
| target | string | yes | fsproj, fsx, sln, directory or glob to analyze |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
list_rules ~20
The rule catalog: code, category, enabled-by-default.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the FSharp.Refactor MCP server?
FSharp.Refactor runs locally as a NuGet package, launched with dnx fsharp-refactor@0.8.45 --yes. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 3 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.
nuget · fsharp-refactor
claude mcp add thorium-fsharp-refactor -- dnx fsharp-refactor@0.8.45 --yes
What is the FSharp.Refactor MCP server?
FSharp.Refactor is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.Thorium/fsharp-refactor. Offline analyzers that find and fix intent-hiding, slow or noisy F#, including agent-written code. This page covers its NuGet package (fsharp-refactor).
Is the FSharp.Refactor MCP server safe to use?
FSharp.Refactor scores 75 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. We found no known CVEs affecting it as of 5 November 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 FSharp.Refactor MCP server expose?
FSharp.Refactor exposes 2 tools: analyze, list_rules. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 180 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Is the FSharp.Refactor MCP server still maintained?
FSharp.Refactor is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 5 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 FSharp.Refactor MCP server under?
FSharp.Refactor declares the Unlicense licence, which is OSI-approved. That covers the source only, and says nothing about the cost of any service it calls.