gonzalgo
PYPI · GONZALGO
Reports what a checked Lean 4 or Metamath proof rests on: inherited sorry, compiler trust, axioms.
Available components
Last scanned (17 hours ago)
Scores higher than 76% of PyPI servers
Deprecated
This server is marked deprecated in the MCP registry.
The registry records this reason: Migrated to io.github.vince-gonzalez/gonzalgo.
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 1 dependencies flagged as unhealthy. View diagnostics → Pass
Provenance & Transparency19
- Repository check failed: the declared repository URL redirects; it must resolve directly. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
- Provenance check failed: no build-provenance attestation is published. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
- Clear OSI-approved license (Apache-2.0).Pass
- Actively maintained (last published 54 days ago).Pass
- Disclosure check failed: no security disclosure policy was found in the source repository. See how to fix → Fail
Schema Quality & AI Usability78
- AI-judged instruction clarity (excellent).Pass
- Tool/resource definitions use about 938 tokens (~93/item across 10 items; 10 tools + 0 resources), lean.Pass
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management100
- No destabilizing schema changes in the last 30 days.Pass
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 10 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 11 captured unit(s) of tool text and found none that tries to manipulate the model reading it.Pass
Capabilities100
- Implements a current MCP spec version (2026-07-28).Pass
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.
- 1 Nov 26 +1
- Stability: 0.97 → pass security
- 31 Oct 26 −1
- Stability: pass → 0.97 functional
- 25 Oct 26 +1
- Stability: 0.97 → pass security
- 23 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 90 to 93. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 27 days of observed history at the previous scan, 28 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 21 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 83 to 87. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 25 days of observed history at the previous scan, 26 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 19 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 77 to 80. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 23 days of observed history at the previous scan, 24 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 17 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 70 to 73. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 21 days of observed history at the previous scan, 22 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 15 Oct 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.
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 4 Nov 2026 · Analysed pypi/gonzalgo@0.5.2
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 1 package
| Packages resolved | 1 |
|---|---|
| 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_trust ~89
THE SAFETY CHECK. Given a Lean dependency dump, report whether any theorem rests on an unfinished proof (`sorry`) or on trusting the compiler (`native_decide`), and how far an optional axiom reaches. This is the tool to reach for when asked whether a formalisation is sound, complete, or trustworthy. Requires a dump — see how_to_extract.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| dump | string | yes | – |
Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.
No examples provided.
axiom_reach ~72
How far an axiom reaches through a library, and where it is actually spent rather than inherited. Reports dependents, entry points (the declarations citing it directly — the positions someone would have to edit to remove it) and amplification.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| axiom | string | – | – |
| dump | string | yes | – |
Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.
No examples provided.
check_dump ~56
Verify a dependency dump is usable before drawing conclusions from it. Raises if the dump contains no proof terms, which silently inverts every downstream number. Cheap; call it when a dump's provenance is unknown.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| dump | string | yes | – |
Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.
No examples provided.
how_to_extract ~61
Return the exact commands that produce the dependency dump every other tool needs, for a given Lean 4 project directory. Use when the user has a Lean project but no dump yet.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| project_dir | string | – | – |
| root_module | string | – | – |
Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.
No examples provided.
impact ~91
What breaks if this declaration changes. Splits dependents into those naming it in a STATEMENT — whose meaning changes with it, so their own users may need rewriting — and those using it only in a PROOF, which merely rebuild. Use before a refactor, or to judge how risky a change is.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| declaration | string | yes | – |
| dump | string | yes | – |
| limit | integer | – | – |
Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.
No examples provided.
kernel_index ~71
The Kernel Index: published measurements of what well-known formal libraries rest on — Mathlib, Lean core, Std, Batteries and others, plus five Metamath databases. Needs no files and no dump. Use it to answer questions about known libraries, or to give a user a reference point for their own numbers.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.
No examples provided.
metamath_audit ~71
Audit Metamath databases (set.mm, iset.mm, nf.mm, ql.mm, hol.mm). Reports theorems, logical axioms identified by typecode rather than naming convention, entry points and amplification. Give filesystem paths to the .mm files.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| paths | array | yes | – |
Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.
No examples provided.
scope ~83
Report what gonzalgo can and cannot answer. CALL THIS FIRST when a user asks anything resembling 'is this proof correct', 'does this paper check out', 'check my homework', or 'is this AI slop'. It will tell you whether the question is answerable with these tools, and what to say if it is not. Takes no arguments and needs no files.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.
No examples provided.
why ~95
Explain WHY a declaration depends on an axiom: the shortest dependency path, with each step labelled a statement dependency or a proof dependency. `#print axioms` answers whether; this answers why. A path made only of proof edges can often be rerouted; a statement edge cannot be touched without changing what the theorem says.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| axiom | string | – | – |
| declaration | string | yes | – |
| dump | string | yes | – |
Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.
No examples provided.
write_lean_extractors ~43
Write the Lean extractor files into a directory, so the user can run them against their own project. Returns the paths written.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| directory | string | yes | – |
Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.
No examples provided.
How do I install the gonzalgo MCP server?
gonzalgo runs locally as a PyPI package, launched with uvx gonzalgo. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.
pypi · gonzalgo
claude mcp add zengineco-gonzalgo -- uvx gonzalgo
What is the gonzalgo MCP server?
gonzalgo is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.zengineco/gonzalgo. Reports what a checked Lean 4 or Metamath proof rests on: inherited sorry, compiler trust, axioms. This page covers its PyPI package (gonzalgo).
Is the gonzalgo MCP server safe to use?
gonzalgo scores 78 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. We found no known CVEs affecting it as of 4 November 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 gonzalgo MCP server expose?
gonzalgo exposes 10 tools: scope, how_to_extract, check_dump, audit_trust, why, and 5 more. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 732 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Is the gonzalgo MCP server still maintained?
gonzalgo is marked deprecated in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 4 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 gonzalgo MCP server under?
gonzalgo declares the Apache-2.0 licence, which is OSI-approved. That covers the source only, and says nothing about the cost of any service it calls.