Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Redproof

Redproof

by HowlinMan24
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Start a Redproof scan

scan_github_repo

Start a security scan of a public AI-built GitHub repository to detect open Supabase tables, exposed keys, unprotected server functions, and unverified webhooks.

Instructions

Start a security check of a public GitHub repository built with AI tools (Lovable, Bolt, Cursor...). Only for code the user owns or may have reviewed: ask them first and set owner_confirmed only after they say yes. Returns a token; call get_report with it after about a minute.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "url": "<url>",
      "owner_confirmed": "<owner_confirmed>"
    },
    "name": "scan_github_repo"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesGitHub repository URL, e.g. https://github.com/owner/repo
owner_confirmedYesTrue only if the user confirmed they own this code or are allowed to have it reviewed

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already mark this as non-read-only and open-world, so the agent knows it is a mutating external call. The description adds genuinely new behavior: it is asynchronous, it returns a token, and results arrive after roughly a minute via get_report, plus a consent gate before invocation. It stops short of saying what happens to the repository data (upload, storage, retention) or any rate/cost limits, which would be the remaining valuable additions.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three compact sentences: purpose first, consent condition second, return-and-follow-up third. Every sentence carries actionable information with no filler or repetition.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a two-parameter async scan tool with no output schema, the description covers the input intent, the consent gate, the return value (a token), and the follow-up tool and timing. Nothing an agent needs to invoke and then retrieve results is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented, which sets the baseline at 3. The description goes beyond the schema by imposing a procedural obligation on owner_confirmed — ask the user first and only then set it true — which is policy the schema text does not fully convey.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource — 'Start a security check of a public GitHub repository' — and narrows the scope to repos built with AI tools (Lovable, Bolt, Cursor). It also names the downstream sibling get_report, so an agent can place this tool in the workflow immediately.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives an explicit precondition (only code the user owns or may have reviewed), an interaction rule (ask the user first, set owner_confirmed only after they say yes), and a sequencing rule (call get_report with the token after about a minute). Both when-to-use and what-to-do-next are spelled out rather than implied.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools