PDF Accessibility Audit
NPM · PDF-A11Y-AUDIT
Local-first PDF accessibility audits with cited findings and an offline HTML report.
Available components
Last scanned (1 hour ago)
Scores higher than 41% of npm servers
Category Documents and Files
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
- 33 of 110 dependencies flagged as unhealthy. View diagnostics → Partial
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 1 days ago).Pass
- Publishes a security disclosure policy (SECURITY.md).Pass
Schema Quality & AI Usability80
- 100% of prompts and resources have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the item's name).Pass
- AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
- Tool/resource definitions use about 441 tokens (~55/item across 8 items; 6 tools + 2 resources), lean.Pass
- 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 Coverage92
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 75% 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 6 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 7 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.
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 71
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 5 Nov 2026 · Analysed npm/pdf-a11y-audit@0.1.2
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 110 packages
| Packages resolved | 110 |
|---|---|
| Stale | 33 |
| 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 →
audit_batch Audit a folder of PDFs ~79
Audit every PDF in one or more local files or directories and return a compact comparison table. Use JSON to get full reports.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| format | string | – | Output format (default markdown) |
| maxFindings | integer | – | – |
| paths | array | yes | Files or directories to scan |
| recursive | boolean | – | Walk subdirectories (default true) |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
audit_pdf Audit a PDF ~120
Audit one local PDF for accessibility structure, headings, tables, figures, forms, reading order, fonts, scans, metadata and navigation. Returns JSON, Markdown or a self-contained HTML report. No upload and no model call.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| format | string | – | Output format (default markdown) |
| maxFindings | integer | – | Cap findings per document (default 500) |
| output | string | – | Write HTML or Markdown to this path; omit to return text or use the default HTML filename |
| path | string | yes | Path to a local PDF file |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
compare_reports Compare two audit reports ~58
Compare two pdf-a11y-audit JSON reports and list new, fixed and persisting findings plus the score change.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| after | string | yes | Path to the later JSON report |
| before | string | yes | Path to the earlier JSON report |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
explain_finding Explain a finding ~54
Return the rule description, severity, standards mapping and remediation guidance for a rule ID such as pdfua.tagged or figures.missing-alt.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| ruleId | string | yes | Rule ID, for example figures.missing-alt |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
list_checks List checks ~48
List the audit rule catalog, including manual checks. Filter by category, severity or automation status.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| automated | boolean | – | – |
| category | string | – | – |
| severity | string | – | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
render_report Render a JSON report as HTML ~48
Turn an existing pdf-a11y-audit JSON report into the self-contained HTML report.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| output | string | – | HTML output path |
| report | string | yes | Path to a JSON report |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the PDF Accessibility Audit MCP server?
PDF Accessibility Audit runs locally as an npm package, launched with npx -y pdf-a11y-audit. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.
npm · pdf-a11y-audit
claude mcp add veduis-pdf-a11y-audit -- npx -y pdf-a11y-audit
What is the PDF Accessibility Audit MCP server?
PDF Accessibility Audit is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.Veduis/pdf-a11y-audit. Local-first PDF accessibility audits with cited findings and an offline HTML report. This page covers its npm package (pdf-a11y-audit).
Is the PDF Accessibility Audit MCP server safe to use?
PDF Accessibility Audit scores 71 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 PDF Accessibility Audit MCP server expose?
PDF Accessibility Audit exposes 6 tools: audit_pdf, audit_batch, explain_finding, list_checks, compare_reports, render_report. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 407 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Is the PDF Accessibility Audit MCP server still maintained?
PDF Accessibility Audit 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 PDF Accessibility Audit MCP server under?
PDF Accessibility Audit declares the MIT licence, which is OSI-approved. That covers the source only, and says nothing about the cost of any service it calls.