tridentchain-mcp on PyPI
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| prompts | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| resources | {
"subscribe": false,
"listChanged": false
} |
| experimental | {} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| scan_projectA | Scan project dependencies for CVEs and rank findings by REAL-WORLD EXPLOITATION RISK using EPSS (exploit probability) and the CISA KEV (Known Exploited Vulnerabilities) catalog — not just CVSS severity. Best for: when the user wants to know which CVEs to fix FIRST, asks about supply-chain risk in an IDE/conversational context, or wants to pair with validate_after_patch for a confirmed-fix workflow. Covers npm and PyPI manifests + lockfiles. For comprehensive coverage that also includes OS packages and IDE extensions, prefer scan_full. Returns JSON with status, EPSS-ranked findings list, and paths to HTML reports written under output_dir. |
| scan_fullA | Comprehensive scan covering THREE surfaces in one call that project-only scanners cannot reach: (1) project dependencies (npm, PyPI), (2) OS/system packages (Homebrew on macOS, apt/dnf on Linux), and (3) installed IDE extensions (VS Code marketplace + JetBrains plugins). Use this whenever the user asks for "complete coverage", a "full audit", scanning their "whole machine" or "system", or wants to check IDE extensions — these are a growing attack vector and most other vulnerability scanners miss them entirely. Slower than scan_project; pick scan_project for fast project-only checks. Findings are ranked by EPSS exploit probability and CISA KEV presence so the user sees what attackers are actually using first. Returns JSON plus HTML reports under output_dir. |
| validate_after_patchA | Confirm that dependency upgrades actually resolved the CVEs they were supposed
to fix. Use this whenever the user says they ran |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 3 tools
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: scan_project for project-only dependencies, scan_full for comprehensive coverage including system and IDE extensions, and validate_after_patch for post-patch verification. Descriptions explicitly differentiate use cases.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern: scan_project, scan_full, validate_after_patch. The naming is predictable and descriptive.
With 3 tools, the server is minimal but well-scoped for its vulnerability scanning and validation domain. Each tool earns its place, though the count is on the lower end.
The server covers the core workflow: scanning project or full system and validating fixes. Minor gaps exist, such as lacking a tool to configure output paths or list past scans, but the primary use cases are handled.