Skip to main content
Glama
salesforce-deployment-guard

salesforce-deployment-guard

by qpulce-dev

Salesforce Deployment Guard MCP

CI

A local-only Model Context Protocol server that turns Salesforce-style deployment evidence into structured findings and remediation steps.

This is a clean-room portfolio project. It uses deterministic rules and synthetic examples—no Salesforce org, credentials, LLM, telemetry, or network access.

Tools

Tool

Purpose

analyze_deployment_log

Classifies missing metadata, invalid references, Apex test failures, permission failures, malformed XML, and unknown evidence.

validate_metadata_manifest

Detects missing dependencies, duplicates, invalid names, self-dependencies, and cycles.

assess_permission_risk

Flags broad system permissions, object Modify All, duplicate changes, and write-without-read combinations.

build_remediation_plan

Turns findings into a deterministic, priority-ordered checklist.

Every tool is read-only and returns both human-readable text and structured JSON.

Related MCP server: Security & GRC MCP Server

Quick start

Requirements: Node.js 20.19 or newer.

git clone https://github.com/qpulce-dev/salesforce-deployment-guard-mcp.git
cd salesforce-deployment-guard-mcp
npm ci
npm run verify
npm run build

Connect an MCP client

Codex CLI:

codex mcp add salesforce-deployment-guard -- node "/absolute/path/to/salesforce-deployment-guard-mcp/dist/server.js"

Claude Desktop-compatible configuration:

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "salesforce-deployment-guard": {
      "command": "node",
      "args": [
        "/absolute/path/to/salesforce-deployment-guard-mcp/dist/server.js"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Restart the client after changing its MCP configuration.

Live MCP transcript

Captured from a real MCP client connected to the built server over stdio:

connected: salesforce-deployment-guard-mcp
tools: analyze_deployment_log, validate_metadata_manifest, assess_permission_risk, build_remediation_plan
call: analyze_deployment_log
arguments: {"log":"Error: no CustomField named Demo__c.Region__c found"}
{
  "status": "issues_found",
  "findings": [
    {
      "code": "SF_MISSING_METADATA",
      "category": "missing_dependency",
      "severity": "error",
      "evidence": "Error: no CustomField named Demo__c.Region__c found",
      "likelyCause": "A referenced metadata component is absent from the deployment set or target org.",
      "nextChecks": [
        "Confirm the referenced component exists in source control.",
        "Add the dependency to the deployment manifest before its consumer."
      ]
    }
  ]
}

The fixtures/ directory contains additional synthetic inputs.

Architecture

MCP client
  -> Zod input schema
  -> small tool handler
  -> deterministic domain function
  -> structured JSON + concise text
  • src/server.ts registers tools and owns stdio startup.

  • src/domain/ contains pure diagnostic and planning logic.

  • src/tools/result.ts formats stable MCP responses.

  • tests/ covers domain behavior, privacy rules, and a real stdio MCP handshake.

  • fixtures/ contains synthetic examples only.

Verification

npm run verify

That command runs formatting, ESLint, strict TypeScript checks, 39 tests, a production build, and the privacy scan. The MCP smoke test launches the built server, negotiates a client connection, lists all four tools, and calls one tool.

CI runs the same verification on Node.js 20.19 and 22.

Privacy and security

  • No runtime network calls.

  • No data persistence or telemetry.

  • No environment variables or credentials required.

  • Inputs are bounded before analysis.

  • Errors do not return stack traces or local paths.

  • Included examples use names such as Demo__c and Demo_Access.

  • The privacy scanner reports only file and rule identifiers, never matched secret text.

For an extra local organization-name check:

PRIVATE_ORG_NAMES="Private Org One,Private Org Two" npm run privacy:scan

Do not paste real production logs into public issues, commits, or fixtures.

Limits

This server provides deterministic review guidance. It does not connect to Salesforce, validate against a live org, replace a security review, or guarantee deployment success. Unknown evidence stays classified as unknown.

License

MIT © 2026 Queanu Pulce

Available Tools

4 tools
analyze_deployment_logAnalyze Salesforce Deployment LogA
Read-only

Classify common Salesforce deployment failures using deterministic, local-only rules.

Inputs: log (required). Returns: status, findings

assess_permission_riskAssess Salesforce Permission RiskA
Read-only

Review synthetic permission changes for broad access and least-privilege concerns.

Inputs: changes (required). Returns: risk, findings

build_remediation_planBuild Salesforce Deployment Remediation PlanB
Read-only

Turn diagnostic findings into a deterministic, prioritized remediation checklist.

Inputs: findings (required). Returns: steps, status

validate_metadata_manifestValidate Salesforce Metadata ManifestA
Read-only

Detect missing dependencies, duplicate entries, invalid names, self-references, and dependency cycles.

Inputs: components (required). Returns: valid, findings, componentCount

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Loading tool schema changelog…

    TDQS

    A4/5.0

    Scored across 4 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool has a clearly distinct role in the deployment-guard workflow: analyzing logs, validating manifests, reviewing permissions, and generating remediation plans. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tool names follow the same verb_noun pattern (analyze_, validate_, assess_, build_), creating a predictable and consistent naming convention that makes it easy for an agent to infer each tool's purpose.

    Tool Count5/5

    Four tools is well-scoped for a deployment guard server. The set covers the essential phases—diagnosis, validation, risk assessment, and remediation—without unnecessary bloat or missing core functionality.

    Completeness4/5

    The four tools form a coherent pipeline from failure analysis through remediation planning. Minor gaps exist, such as no direct tool for retrieving raw deployment logs or applying fixes, but these are likely outside the server's declared guard purpose.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessNo recent community issues

    Related MCP Connectors

    Related MCP Servers

    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables local security scanning and compliance gap analysis for code and text, detecting secrets, PII, and OWASP vulnerabilities, and assessing readiness across major frameworks like NCA, ISO 27001, NIST CSF, and SOC 2.
      -
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables security review of code diffs and files in Cursor/VS Code using local rule-based analysis with the same rule IDs as CI, no cloud required.
      Apache 2.0
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables safe, local DevOps inspection through a JSON-lines server with schema validation, path isolation, and redaction, supporting read-only Git operations, Kubernetes YAML validation, Terraform plan summaries, and sanitized log analysis.
      MIT