VibeCheck MCP Server
# VibeCheck MCP Server
AI-powered security audit tool for codebases. Analyzes code for vulnerabilities using real-time data from MITRE CWE and npm audit.
## Features
- **AI-Powered Analysis**: Uses MCP sampling to analyze code with Claude
- **Real-Time CWE Data**: Fetches vulnerability definitions from MITRE's CWE API
- **Dependency Scanning**: Uses npm audit for package vulnerability checks
- **Zero Configuration**: No API keys required to get started
## Installation
### Claude Code (Recommended)
```bash
/plugin marketplace add philiphess1/vibecheck-mcp
/plugin install vibecheck@vibecheck
```
### Manual Installation
Add to your Claude Desktop config (`~/.claude/claude_desktop_config.json`):
```json
{
"mcpServers": {
"vibecheck": {
"command": "npx",
"args": ["-y", "vibecheck-audit-mcp"]
}
}
}
```
### From Source
```bash
git clone https://github.com/philiphess1/vibecheck-mcp.git
cd vibecheck-mcp
npm install && npm run build
```
## Tools
### scan_codebase
Full AI-powered security audit with real-time vulnerability data.
**Analyzes:**
- Authentication and authorization issues
- API security vulnerabilities
- Database security rules
- Exposed secrets and environment variables
- Dependency vulnerabilities (via npm audit)
- Data flow and injection vulnerabilities
**Input:**
```json
{
"path": "/path/to/codebase",
"categories": ["auth", "api", "secrets-env"],
"severityThreshold": "medium"
}
```
Or provide files directly:
```json
{
"files": [
{ "path": "src/auth.ts", "content": "..." }
]
}
```
**Categories:**
- `auth` - Authentication, sessions, middleware
- `api` - API routes, endpoints
- `database-rules` - Firebase/Supabase rules, Prisma schemas
- `secrets-env` - Environment variables, config files
- `dependencies` - package.json vulnerabilities
- `data-flow` - User input handling, injection points
### check_dependencies
Quick dependency-only scan using npm audit.
**Input:**
```json
{
"path": "/path/to/project",
"includeDevDependencies": false
}
```
**Requirements:**
- npm installed
- `package-lock.json` in the project
## Data Sources
| Source | Purpose | Auth Required |
|--------|---------|---------------|
| MITRE CWE API | Vulnerability definitions | No |
| npm audit | Package CVEs | No |
| OWASP | Security categories | No (bundled) |
## Development
```bash
# Build
npm run build
# Watch mode
npm run dev
# Run directly
npm start
```
## How It Works
1. **File Reading**: Reads files from the specified path or accepts file contents directly
2. **Hotspot Collection**: Categorizes files by security relevance (auth, api, secrets, etc.)
3. **Dependency Audit**: Runs `npm audit` if package-lock.json exists
4. **AI Analysis**: Uses MCP sampling to analyze each category with expert prompts
5. **CWE Enrichment**: Fetches relevant CWE definitions from MITRE API
6. **Results**: Returns structured findings with severity, CWE/OWASP refs, and remediation steps
## Output Format
```json
{
"findings": [
{
"id": "uuid",
"type": "hardcoded-secret",
"severity": "critical",
"title": "Hardcoded API Key",
"description": "...",
"filePath": "src/config.ts",
"lineNumber": 42,
"codeSnippet": "const API_KEY = 'sk-...'",
"aiReasoning": "...",
"confidence": 95,
"cwes": [{ "id": "CWE-798", "name": "..." }],
"owasp": [{ "id": "A02:2021", "name": "..." }],
"remediation": {
"summary": "Use environment variables",
"steps": ["..."]
}
}
],
"dependencyVulnerabilities": [...],
"summary": {
"totalFindings": 5,
"critical": 1,
"high": 2,
"medium": 2,
"low": 0,
"vulnerableDependencies": 3
},
"scanDuration": 12500
}
```
## License
MIT
TDQS
Scored across 2 tools
The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: check_dependencies focuses specifically on dependency vulnerabilities via npm audit, while scan_codebase performs a comprehensive AI-powered security audit across multiple code aspects. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them.
Both tools follow a consistent verb_noun naming pattern (check_dependencies and scan_codebase) with clear, descriptive names that accurately reflect their functions. The naming style is uniform throughout.
With only 2 tools, the server feels too thin for its apparent scope of security auditing. While the tools cover dependency scanning and codebase analysis, a security-focused server would typically benefit from more granular tools (e.g., for specific vulnerability types, remediation actions, or report generation).
The tools provide good coverage for vulnerability detection (dependencies and code), but there are notable gaps in the security lifecycle. Missing are tools for remediation (e.g., apply_fixes, update_dependencies), reporting (e.g., generate_report), or configuration management, which limits agent workflows to detection-only scenarios.