io.github.tomjwxf/acta-mcp
NPM · ACTA-MCP · SCANNED SEP 22
Contribute, challenge, verify, and query contestable public records on Veritas Acta.
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 → Why this is hard to score →
Supply Chain Security98
- 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
- 31 of 97 dependencies flagged as unhealthy. 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 174 days ago).Pass
- Disclosure check failed: no security disclosure policy was found in the source repository. See how to fix → Fail
Schema Quality & AI Usability71
- AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
- Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 842 tokens (~140/item across 6 items; 6 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 Management97
- Stability observed for 29 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 6 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 6 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
How do I install the io.github.tomjwxf/acta-mcp server?
io.github.tomjwxf/acta-mcp runs locally as an npm package, launched with npx -y acta-mcp. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.
npm · acta-mcp
claude mcp add tomjwxf-acta-mcp -- npx -y acta-mcp
{
"mcpServers": {
"tomjwxf-acta-mcp": {
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"-y",
"acta-mcp"
]
}
}
} {
"servers": {
"tomjwxf-acta-mcp": {
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"-y",
"acta-mcp"
]
}
}
} codex mcp add tomjwxf-acta-mcp -- npx -y acta-mcp
{
"$schema": "https://opencode.ai/config.json",
"mcp": {
"tomjwxf-acta-mcp": {
"type": "local",
"command": [
"npx",
"-y",
"acta-mcp"
],
"enabled": true
}
}
} openclaw mcp add tomjwxf-acta-mcp --command npx --arg -y --arg acta-mcp
mcp_servers:
tomjwxf-acta-mcp:
command: "npx"
args: ["-y", "acta-mcp"] {
"McpServers": {
"tomjwxf-acta-mcp": {
"Transport": "stdio",
"Command": "npx",
"Arguments": [
"-y",
"acta-mcp"
]
}
}
} assistant mcp add tomjwxf-acta-mcp -t stdio -c npx -a -y acta-mcp
{
"mcpServers": {
"tomjwxf-acta-mcp": {
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"-y",
"acta-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.
- 22 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 93 to 97. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 28 days of observed history at the previous scan, 29 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 20 Sept 26 +1
- Security disclosure: unverified → fail ▼ functional
- 19 Sept 26 0
- Security disclosure: fail → unverified ▼ functional
- 18 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 80 to 83. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 24 days of observed history at the previous scan, 25 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 17 Sept 26 −3
- Stability: pass → 0.80 functional
- 16 Sept 26 0
- Stability: 0.97 → pass security
- 15 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 93 to 97. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 28 days of observed history at the previous scan, 29 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 13 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 87 to 90. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 26 days of observed history at the previous scan, 27 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 Sept 2026 · Analysed npm/acta-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 | npm |
Background: How many MCP packages publish verified provenance →
Dependencies 97 packages
| Packages resolved | 97 |
|---|---|
| Stale | 31 |
| 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 →
acta_contribute ~241
Submit a typed contribution to the Acta public record. Questions have no evidence burden. Factual claims require a source or reasoning. Opinion/hypothesis claims require uncertainty. Predictions require resolution criteria, date, source, and rule.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| body | string | yes | Full text of the contribution |
| category | string | – | Required for claims |
| provenance | object | – | Optional AI authorship metadata |
| reasoning | string | – | Reasoning (alternative to source for factual claims) |
| resolution_criteria | string | – | How to determine if confirmed/refuted (required for predictions) |
| resolution_date | string | – | ISO-8601 future date (required for predictions) |
| resolution_rule | string | – | Who/what triggers resolution (required for predictions) |
| resolution_source | string | – | Authoritative source for resolution (required for predictions) |
| source | string | – | URL to supporting evidence (required for factual claims) |
| topic | string | yes | Topic slug (e.g. "ai-regulation-2026") |
| type | string | yes | Contribution type |
| uncertainty | string | – | Uncertainty statement (required for opinion/hypothesis claims) |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
acta_discover ~111
Find actionable work across the Acta record. Surfaces contested records needing evidence, claims with no evidence, predictions approaching resolution, and recently active topics. This is the "where am I needed?" tool.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | number | – | Maximum results (default: 10) |
| mode | string | yes | contested: records in contested state. needs_evidence: claims/predictions with no linked evidence. approaching_resolution: predictions with resolution dates within 30 days. recent_activity: topics wi… |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
acta_export ~54
Export the full hash chain for a topic. Returns all entries with hashes for independent verification using tools/verify.js. Use this when you need to audit the record independently.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| topic | string | yes | Topic slug to export |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
acta_query ~139
Browse the Acta public record. List topics (optionally filtered), get entries for a topic (with type/state filters), or look up a single entry with its responses.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| action | string | yes | list_topics: browse topics. feed: entries for a topic. entry: single entry with responses. |
| entry_id | string | – | Entry ID (required for entry action) |
| q | string | – | Filter topic names by substring (for list_topics) |
| state | string | – | Filter feed by computed state |
| topic | string | – | Topic slug (required for feed action) |
| type | string | – | Filter feed by contribution type |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
acta_respond ~231
Submit a response to an existing entry. Evidence requires source + stance. Challenges require target_assertion + basis + argument (min 20 chars). Updates require update_type. Resolutions require outcome + source + resolution_type.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| argument | string | – | Substantive refutation (min 20 chars, required for challenges) |
| basis | string | – | Required for challenges |
| body | string | yes | Response text |
| outcome | string | – | Resolution outcome (required for resolutions) |
| provenance | object | – | Optional AI authorship metadata |
| resolution_type | string | – | Required for resolutions |
| source | string | – | Source URL (required for evidence, counter_evidence/source_unreliable challenges, and resolutions) |
| stance | string | – | Required for evidence |
| target_assertion | string | – | Quote the specific assertion being challenged (min 5 chars, required for challenges) |
| target_id | string | yes | Entry ID being responded to |
| topic | string | yes | Topic slug |
| type | string | yes | Response type |
| update_type | string | – | Required for updates |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
acta_verify ~66
Verify the hash chain integrity for a specific topic. Returns chain length, chain head hash, and any integrity issues. Note: this is operator-served verification. For independent verification, use acta_export and run verify.js locally.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| topic | string | yes | Topic slug to verify |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
What is the io.github.tomjwxf/acta-mcp server?
io.github.tomjwxf/acta-mcp is listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.tomjwxf/acta-mcp. Contribute, challenge, verify, and query contestable public records on Veritas Acta. This page covers its npm package (acta-mcp).
Is the io.github.tomjwxf/acta-mcp server safe to use?
io.github.tomjwxf/acta-mcp scores 83 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. We found no known CVEs affecting it as of 22 September 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 io.github.tomjwxf/acta-mcp server expose?
io.github.tomjwxf/acta-mcp exposes 6 tools: acta_contribute, acta_respond, acta_query, acta_discover, acta_verify, acta_export. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 842 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Is the io.github.tomjwxf/acta-mcp server still maintained?
io.github.tomjwxf/acta-mcp is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 22 September 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.tomjwxf/acta-mcp server under?
io.github.tomjwxf/acta-mcp declares the MIT licence, which is OSI-approved. That covers the source only, and says nothing about the cost of any service it calls.