scopeguard-mcp
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| SCOPEGUARD_MAX_FILES | No | Repository scan file ceiling | 5000 |
| SCOPEGUARD_STATE_DIR | No | SQLite state and audit database | <cwd>/.scopeguard |
| SCOPEGUARD_ALLOWED_ROOTS | No | Path-separated operator allowlist | current directory |
| SCOPEGUARD_MAX_FILE_BYTES | No | Per-file read ceiling | 1000000 |
| SCOPEGUARD_EXECUTION_ENABLED | No | Enables execute engagements when true | false |
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 |
|---|---|
| healthA | Return server safety settings, capabilities, and audit-chain health. |
| create_dry_run_engagementA | Create a non-executing assessment scope; execute mode is operator-CLI only. |
| revoke_engagementB | Immediately revoke an engagement and prevent further target operations. |
| check_scopeA | Normalize a target and report whether it is inside the engagement scope. |
| plan_assessmentA | Create a bounded web or repository assessment plan without running network tools. |
| analyze_headersA | Analyze caller-supplied response headers offline; no HTTP request is performed. |
| scan_repositoryA | Run built-in read-only Python and secret checks under operator-allowed roots. |
| list_audit_eventsA | Return recent audit events when the engagement includes audit:read. |
| verify_audit_chainA | Verify every persisted event against the tamper-evident hash chain. |
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 9 tools
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: health for status, engagement lifecycle (create/revoke), scope checking, planning, header analysis, repository scanning, and audit operations (list/verify). Even the two audit tools are distinct in intent—listing versus verifying integrity. There is no meaningful overlap that would cause an agent to select the wrong tool.
Most tools follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (create_dry_run_engagement, revoke_engagement, check_scope, plan_assessment, analyze_headers, scan_repository, list_audit_events, verify_audit_chain). The only deviation is 'health', which is a noun instead of a verb_noun form, but this is a common exception for status endpoints and does not detract from overall readability.
With 9 tools, this server is well-scoped for its domain of security assessment scope management. Each tool addresses a distinct operation without redundancy, and the count feels neither thin nor bloated.
The tool surface covers engagement creation and revocation, scope checking, planning, analysis, scanning, and audit verification. However, there is no way to list existing engagements or retrieve engagement details, which creates a gap in the engagement lifecycle. An agent cannot easily determine what engagements are active or inspect a specific engagement's configuration, limiting practical management.