CodeGuard MCP Server
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 | {} |
| prompts | {} |
| resources | {} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| get_security_instructionsA | Get security instructions for code generation. Returns applicable security rules based on language, context, or file path. |
| validate_code_securityB | Validate code snippet against security rules and return applicable instructions |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| get_security_instructions | Get security instructions for code generation based on language and context |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| All CodeGuard Security Instructions | Complete set of all security instructions |
| Python Security Instructions | Security instructions for Python development |
| JavaScript Security Instructions | Security instructions for JavaScript development |
| TypeScript Security Instructions | Security instructions for TypeScript development |
| Instructions by File Path | Get instructions matching a specific file pattern (use ?path= query param) |
TDQS
Scored across 2 tools
The two tools have distinct purposes: one retrieves security instructions based on context, the other validates code against rules. However, both involve security instructions, which could cause minor confusion without careful reading.
Both tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case, 'get_security_instructions' and 'validate_code_security', making them predictable and clear.
With only two tools, the server feels thin for a security-focused service. While the core operations are present, the scope appears limited, and additional tools for rule management would be expected.
The server lacks tools for managing or listing security rules, and the validation tool does not provide detailed violation reports. This leaves notable gaps in a typical security workflow.