Skip to main content
Glama
tedorigawa001

OSV-Scanner-MCP

OSV-Scanner-MCP

CI npm version license node

An MCP server that wraps Google's OSV-Scanner. Ask an MCP client such as Claude to "check this project for vulnerabilities", and it returns the known vulnerabilities (CVE / GHSA) in your dependencies as a report sorted by severity, together with recommended upgrades.

Status: Published on npm (npx -y osv-scanner-mcp). Supports lockfiles and manifests for Java (Maven / Gradle), JavaScript (npm / yarn / pnpm / bun), Python (Poetry / uv / Pipenv / PDM / requirements.txt), Go, and Rust (Cargo.lock), with upgrade recommendations for Maven, npm, PyPI, Go, and crates.io. Setup instructions are provided for Claude Code, Claude Desktop, Codex CLI, Antigravity, and VS Code (GitHub Copilot).

Features

  • One-shot multi-language scan: Pass a project path to scan_project, and it detects and scans the Java, JavaScript, Python, Go, and Rust lockfiles in the project together. Dependencies that could not be scanned (for example, a manifest without a lockfile or an unpinned requirement) are reported up front in coverage

  • Upgrade recommendations: suggest_fix recommends, for each vulnerable package, the upgrade closest to the current release line that addresses its fix targets, for Maven, npm, PyPI, Go, and Rust (crates.io). Known unfixed and informational advisories remain visible. The recommended version is also checked against the OSV database for additional fix-target vulnerabilities

  • Rust without false positives: For Cargo.lock, only crates from crates.io are scanned. Your own workspace crates, git dependencies, and crates from private registries are not looked up as crates.io crates (OSV-Scanner alone would match them by name, and send their names to the OSV API). RustSec notices about unmaintained or unsound crates are labeled informational and counted apart from vulnerabilities

  • Direct and transitive dependencies: Packages are marked as direct or transitive dependencies (from package-lock.json, go.mod, requirements.txt, and pom.xml), and update hints are tailored accordingly, for example by naming the direct dependency that pulls in a transitive one

  • Java project scan: scan_java_project scans only the Java (Maven / Gradle) manifests and returns a formatted report

  • JAR/WAR scan: scan_java_artifact detects known vulnerabilities from the metadata inside JAR/WAR archives, for projects without a lockfile or with only shaded/fat JARs (best-effort identification, stated explicitly in coverage)

  • SBOM scan: scan_sbom checks the dependencies recorded in a CycloneDX/SPDX JSON SBOM. It states explicitly that the SBOM's completeness and its match with the actual artifacts are not verified

  • Severity-sorted reports: Vulnerabilities are grouped by package and sorted by CVSS score, with five severity labels (critical / high / medium / low / unknown) and summary counts

  • Fixed versions: Each vulnerability includes fixed_versions, sorted correctly by Maven version precedence (including non-semver forms such as 2.17.1-RELEASE), Semantic Versioning precedence for npm, Go, and Rust, and PEP 440 for PyPI

  • Security first: No shell execution, a fixed argument allowlist, path normalization and boundary checks, scanning private copies instead of the original files, and timeouts and output size limits are built in

Related MCP server: maven-mcp

Requirements

  • Node.js >= 20.19

  • The OSV-Scanner binary — no manual installation needed. If it is not found, a pinned version is downloaded from the official GitHub Releases and verified against a SHA256 checksum embedded in the package before use (cached in ~/.cache/osv-scanner-mcp/)

    • A manually installed binary (on PATH or set with OSV_SCANNER_PATH) is used first

    • Set OSV_MCP_AUTO_DOWNLOAD=0 to disable the automatic download

    • Set OSV_MCP_PREFER_DOWNLOAD=1 to always use the verified downloaded binary instead of one on PATH (recommended for production)

    • The pinned version is osv-scanner 2.7.0. Its binary is cached in ~/.cache/osv-scanner-mcp/v2.7.0/; directories of earlier versions (such as v2.4.0/) are no longer used and can be deleted

  • Scans, suggest_fix, and explain_vulnerability access the network. Vulnerabilities are looked up in the OSV database (api.osv.dev), and scanning pom.xml or requirements.txt also connects to deps.dev (api.deps.dev) to resolve transitive dependencies. See Network destinations and privacy for details and how to turn this off

Setup

Claude Code

claude mcp add osv-scanner -- npx -y osv-scanner-mcp

Claude Desktop

Add to claude_desktop_config.json:

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "osv-scanner": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "osv-scanner-mcp"]
    }
  }
}

Codex CLI

codex mcp add osv-scanner -- npx -y osv-scanner-mcp

Or add to ~/.codex/config.toml:

[mcp_servers.osv-scanner]
command = "npx"
args = ["-y", "osv-scanner-mcp"]
startup_timeout_sec = 60   # allow time for the first npx package download
tool_timeout_sec = 300     # default is 60 seconds; allow for the binary download plus a scan (120 seconds by default)

Note: Codex's MCP tool timeout defaults to 60 seconds, while this server's scan timeout defaults to 120 seconds. With the default, Codex may time out first on the first run (which downloads OSV-Scanner) or on larger projects. Raising tool_timeout_sec as above is recommended.

Antigravity

Open MCP Servers → Manage MCP Servers → View raw config in the agent panel and add to mcp_config.json (same format as Claude Desktop):

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "osv-scanner": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "osv-scanner-mcp"]
    }
  }
}

VS Code (GitHub Copilot)

code --add-mcp '{"name":"osv-scanner","command":"npx","args":["-y","osv-scanner-mcp"]}'

Or add to the workspace's .vscode/mcp.json (also available from MCP: Add Server in the Command Palette):

{
  "servers": {
    "osv-scanner": {
      "type": "stdio",
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "osv-scanner-mcp"]
    }
  }
}

From source

git clone https://github.com/tedorigawa001/OSV-Scanner-MCP.git
cd OSV-Scanner-MCP
npm install
npm run build
# When registering, use `node /path/to/OSV-Scanner-MCP/dist/index.js` instead of `npx -y osv-scanner-mcp`

Environment variables

Variable

Description

OSV_SCANNER_PATH

Explicit path to the osv-scanner binary. If unset, PATH is searched, then the binary is downloaded automatically. If the path is invalid, the server fails instead of falling back (to avoid running an unintended binary)

OSV_MCP_ALLOWED_ROOT

If set, scans outside this directory are refused (the boundary against path traversal). Recommended. An empty or whitespace-only value is treated as unset

OSV_MCP_REQUIRE_ALLOWED_ROOT

If 1 or true, the server refuses to start when OSV_MCP_ALLOWED_ROOT is not set (fail-closed mode for production)

OSV_MCP_MAX_CONCURRENT_SCANS

Maximum number of concurrent scans (default 2, maximum 16). Requests beyond the limit fail immediately instead of waiting

OSV_MCP_AUTO_DOWNLOAD

0 or false disables the automatic binary download (enabled by default)

OSV_MCP_PREFER_DOWNLOAD

If 1 or true, always use the checksum-verified downloaded binary instead of osv-scanner on PATH (protects against a fake binary planted on PATH; an explicit OSV_SCANNER_PATH still takes precedence)

OSV_MCP_NO_CANDIDATE_CHECK

If 1 or true, suggest_fix does not query OSV about recommended versions (candidate_check is disabled, and recommended versions are not checked for known vulnerabilities that do not affect the current version)

OSV_MCP_NO_REMOTE_RESOLUTION

If 1 or true, transitive dependencies of pom.xml and requirements.txt are not resolved through deps.dev. This stops only the requests to deps.dev; package names and versions are still sent to api.osv.dev for the vulnerability lookup. Vulnerabilities in transitive dependencies are then not detected, and responses say so in dependency_resolution.warning. See Network destinations and privacy

Recommendation: The server works without OSV_MCP_ALLOWED_ROOT, but then any absolute path can be scanned. To prevent malicious instructions (prompt injection) from scanning unintended directories, set it to the root of your projects (for example ~/projects). Pass it in the client configuration, for example "env": {"OSV_MCP_ALLOWED_ROOT": "/Users/you/projects"} (in Codex CLI's TOML, use a [mcp_servers.osv-scanner.env] section).

Recommended production configuration: On shared servers, CI, and other production environments, set all three of the following:

  • OSV_MCP_ALLOWED_ROOT=/root/of/scan/targets — fixes the scan boundary

  • OSV_MCP_REQUIRE_ALLOWED_ROOT=1 — refuses to start without a boundary (fail-closed)

  • OSV_SCANNER_PATH=/absolute/path/owned/by/an/administrator or OSV_MCP_PREFER_DOWNLOAD=1 — fixes which binary is run, independent of PATH

Check Network destinations and privacy for where dependency information is sent. In every configuration, package names and versions are sent to api.osv.dev for the vulnerability lookup.

Running with restricted permissions

As an additional layer of defense, you can limit what the server can read and write with Node's permission model (--permission). This is optional and does not change the default way of starting the server. --permission is available in Node 22.13, 23.5, and later (Node 20's experimental --experimental-permission has not been tested). Since npx cannot pass Node flags, start the server with node directly:

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "osv-scanner": {
      "command": "node",
      "args": [
        "--permission",
        "--allow-fs-read=/path/to/OSV-Scanner-MCP",
        "--allow-fs-read=/Users/you/projects",
        "--allow-fs-read=/var/folders/xx/yyyy/T",
        "--allow-fs-read=/private/var/folders/xx/yyyy/T",
        "--allow-fs-write=/private/var/folders/xx/yyyy/T",
        "--allow-fs-read=/opt/homebrew/bin/osv-scanner",
        "--allow-child-process",
        "/path/to/OSV-Scanner-MCP/dist/index.js"
      ],
      "env": {
        "OSV_MCP_ALLOWED_ROOT": "/Users/you/projects",
        "OSV_SCANNER_PATH": "/opt/homebrew/bin/osv-scanner"
      }
    }
  }
}
  • Read access: the server itself (the directory containing dist and node_modules), the scan targets (OSV_MCP_ALLOWED_ROOT), the temporary directory, and the osv-scanner binary

  • The temporary directory (os.tmpdir(), $TMPDIR on macOS) needs read access under both the symlinked and the resolved path (on macOS, /var/folders/... is a symbolic link to /private/var/folders/...). Write access is needed on the resolved path

  • If you use the automatic download, also allow reading and writing the cache ($XDG_CACHE_HOME/osv-scanner-mcp, by default ~/.cache/osv-scanner-mcp). Otherwise, set OSV_SCANNER_PATH

  • --allow-child-process is required to run osv-scanner. osv-scanner runs as a child process and is not restricted by the permission model (Node itself warns that this flag weakens the permission model). The impact is limited because osv-scanner only receives verified private copies, but use an OS-level mechanism such as a container if you need stronger isolation

  • If a required permission is missing, the server prints a warning to stderr at startup, and scans return permission_denied (naming the missing permission and the path)

Network destinations and privacy

Destinations confirmed with osv-scanner v2.4.0 (2026-10-07) and v2.7.0, the pinned version (2026-10-15):

Operation

Destinations

Information sent

Scanning pom.xml (scan_project / scan_java_project / suggest_fix)

api.osv.dev, api.deps.dev

Package names and versions. To resolve transitive dependencies, the names and versions of the dependencies declared in pom.xml (including internal packages) are sent to deps.dev

Scanning requirements.txt (scan_project / suggest_fix)

api.osv.dev, api.deps.dev

As with pom.xml, the names and versions of the listed dependencies are sent to deps.dev to resolve transitive dependencies. Package indexes given with --index-url and similar options are not contacted

Scanning lockfiles (gradle.lockfile, npm lockfiles such as package-lock.json, Python lockfiles such as poetry.lock, go.mod, Cargo.lock)

api.osv.dev

Package names and versions (lockfiles already list every dependency, so nothing is resolved remotely). For Cargo.lock, only crates from crates.io are sent: the names of your own crates, git dependencies, and private-registry crates are not sent (confirmed 2026-10-11). Git dependencies in npm lockfiles (package-lock.json, yarn.lock, and so on) are looked up by their repository URL (ecosystem GIT) and commit, so the host name and path of a private git repository (for example https://git.example.com/team/repo) are sent (since osv-scanner 2.6.0)

scan_java_artifact / scan_sbom

api.osv.dev

Names and versions of the identified packages

suggest_fix checking recommended versions

api.osv.dev

The names of packages with a recommendation (already sent during the scan) and the candidate versions (published fixed versions). Disable with OSV_MCP_NO_CANDIDATE_CHECK=1

explain_vulnerability

api.osv.dev

The vulnerability ID

Automatic binary download (first run only)

GitHub (official Releases)

Nothing (downloads the pinned binary)

Both api.osv.dev and deps.dev are operated by Google. In every configuration, the names and versions of scanned packages are sent to api.osv.dev for the vulnerability lookup (offline lookup is not supported).

  • To stop sending data to deps.dev: Set OSV_MCP_NO_REMOTE_RESOLUTION=1. Transitive dependencies of pom.xml and requirements.txt are then not resolved, and only api.osv.dev is contacted. This stops only the requests to deps.dev; requests to OSV continue. Only the dependencies written in those files are scanned, so vulnerabilities in transitive dependencies are missed. Responses of scan_project / scan_java_project / suggest_fix show this as transitive_resolution: "disabled" in dependency_resolution with a warning, so it can be told apart from zero findings. To scan transitive dependencies without deps.dev, use lockfiles (gradle.lockfile, poetry.lock, and so on)

  • Arbitrary repositories are never contacted: osv-scanner's --data-source native mode connects to any URL listed in <repositories> of the scanned pom.xml (a malicious pom.xml could make it contact an attacker's server). This server never uses that mode and sets deps.dev explicitly

Tools

scan_project

Detects the lockfiles and manifests in a project and scans the Java / JavaScript / Python / Go / Rust dependencies together. Package managers and builds are never run.

Input

Parameter

Type

Description

project_path

string

Absolute path to the project directory, or to a supported lockfile or manifest (a file given directly is the only file scanned)

Supported files

Ecosystem

Files

Java (Maven)

pom.xml, gradle.lockfile, buildscript-gradle.lockfile

JavaScript (npm)

package-lock.json, npm-shrinkwrap.json, yarn.lock, pnpm-lock.yaml, bun.lock (text format)

Python (PyPI)

poetry.lock, uv.lock, Pipfile.lock, pdm.lock, requirements.txt (and variants such as requirements-dev.txt)

Go

go.mod

Rust (crates.io)

Cargo.lock (lockfile versions 1 to 4)

.git, node_modules, target, build, .idea, .vscode, .venv, venv, site-packages, __pycache__, .tox, vendor, .cargo, and symbolic links are not searched. Only the detected files are passed to OSV-Scanner, each with its format given explicitly (coverage.manifests in the response is exactly the scan scope). The search limits are the same as for scan_java_project.

requirements.txt files are not passed to OSV-Scanner as they are. The server parses them, rewrites only the dependency lines it can interpret into simple forms such as name==version, and scans a private temporary copy (deleted after the scan). OSV-Scanner interprets include directives on its own (it even treats - r ../x.txt, with a space, as an include and reads files outside the scan scope), so the copy never contains include directives or options. Includes (-r / --requirement) are expanded by the server, and only when the included file is inside the project directory.

Cargo.lock files are not passed to OSV-Scanner as they are either. OSV-Scanner (v2.4.0 and v2.7.0) ignores where each package comes from and looks every package up as a crates.io crate, so a workspace crate, a git fork, or a private-registry crate with the same name and version as a vulnerable crates.io crate is reported as vulnerable, and its name is sent to the OSV API. The server parses Cargo.lock and scans a private copy that lists only the packages whose source is crates.io (registry+https://github.com/rust-lang/crates.io-index or sparse+https://index.crates.io/), like cargo audit. Packages replaced with [replace] are not scanned, because they are not used (the replacement is classified by its own source). The parser accepts only what Cargo writes; if a Cargo.lock contains anything else, the whole file is excluded and listed in skipped_files instead of being scanned partially. Cargo is never run.

package-lock.json copies get a resolved URL where it is missing. osv-scanner 2.7.0 treats entries without resolved as local packages and does not look them up, which would silently skip bundled dependencies (inBundle) and registry packages in lockfiles generated with npm's omit-lockfile-registry-resolved=true. The private copy that is scanned gets a public-registry URL for those entries (entries under node_modules/ that are not links and have a plain version, and aliases such as npm:lodash@4.17.20 in lockfile version 1), so they are looked up as before; the original file is not changed.

Reading the output

{
  "project_dir": "/path/to/project",
  "dependency_resolution": { "transitive_resolution": "enabled" },
  "coverage": {
    "complete": false,
    "warning": "…",
    "manifests": [{ "path": "web/package-lock.json", "ecosystem": "npm", "format": "package-lock.json" }],
    "lockfile_missing": [{ "path": "svc/package.json", "ecosystem": "npm", "status": "missing", "hint": "…" }],
    "unpinned_requirements": [{ "file": "py/requirements.txt", "line": 2, "name": "Jinja2", "specifier": ">=2.0", "kind": "lower_bound" }],
    "unscannable_requirements": [
      { "file": "py/requirements.txt", "line": 4, "text": "-e git+https://…", "reason": "…" },
      { "file": "py/requirements.txt", "line": 5, "text": "-r ../shared/base.txt", "reason": "…" }
    ],
    "local_crates": 2,
    "unscannable_crates": [{ "file": "Cargo.lock", "name": "my-fork", "version": "1.0.0", "reason": "Git dependency: …" }],
    "skipped_files": []
  },
  "ecosystem_breakdown": { "npm": { "manifests": 1, "vulnerable_package_count": 2, "vulnerability_count": 4 } },
  "vulnerable_package_count": 2,
  "vulnerability_count": 4,
  "severity_breakdown": { "critical": 0, "high": 2, "medium": 2, "low": 0, "unknown": 0 },
  "packages": [
    { "name": "minimist", "version": "1.2.5", "ecosystem": "npm", "dependency_groups": ["dev"], "dependency_relation": "direct", "declared_in": ["package.json"], "vulnerabilities": [] },
    { "name": "qs", "version": "6.7.0", "ecosystem": "npm", "dependency_relation": "transitive", "introduced_by": ["express"], "vulnerabilities": [] }
  ]
}
  • Always check coverage. If complete is false, some dependencies were not scanned, so zero findings does not mean the project is safe

    • lockfile_missing: manifests without a lockfile (package.json, pyproject.toml, Pipfile, setup.py, build.gradle, Cargo.toml, and so on). Not recorded if a lockfile of the same ecosystem is in the same directory. If there is only a lockfile in a parent directory, the manifest is not recorded only when package-lock.json (v2 or later) is confirmed to contain that directory (npm workspaces), or when Cargo.lock contains a local crate with the [package] name of the Cargo.toml and the directory is a member of the workspace according to members / exclude of the Cargo.toml next to Cargo.lock (Cargo workspaces; members globs with * and ? are supported). A crate with the same name that cannot be confirmed as a member, such as a path dependency outside the workspace, is recorded as unconfirmed. Library crates often do not commit Cargo.lock, so their Cargo.toml is recorded here; generate one with cargo generate-lockfile. Otherwise it is recorded with status: "missing", or status: "unconfirmed" for formats that cannot be checked (yarn.lock, Python lockfiles, and so on). Generate the lockfile as described in hint (in a trusted environment) and scan again

    • unpinned_requirements: lines in requirements.txt that do not pin a version. kind is unpinned (no version), range (>, <, !=, ==1.*, combined ranges, and so on), or lower_bound (>=, ~=). OSV-Scanner does not scan unpinned and range lines, and scans lower_bound lines at the lower bound (those packages are marked version_is_lower_bound: true and may differ from the installed version)

    • unscannable_requirements: lines that are not scanned, with the reason: -e, name @ URL, paths, includes that were not expanded (outside the project directory, missing, URLs, or over the limits), constraint files (-c, not applied), and options or version specifiers that cannot be interpreted. Lines that cannot be interpreted are recorded here instead of being ignored

    • local_crates (only when a Cargo.lock was scanned): the number of crates without a source in Cargo.lock (workspace members and path dependencies). They are your own code and are not scanned; they do not make complete false. A third-party crate vendored as a path dependency is not scanned either (as with cargo audit)

    • unscannable_crates (only when a Cargo.lock was scanned): git dependencies (their versions do not correspond to crates.io releases) and crates from registries other than crates.io (a crate with the same name on crates.io may be a different crate). They are not scanned, so complete is false. Source URLs are not included in the response

    • skipped_files: files excluded from the scan, with the reason (a Cargo.lock that cannot be interpreted with certainty, a requirements.txt that cannot be read or is larger than 1 MiB, or a pom.xml whose parent POM chain references a file outside the allowed root). A pom.xml scanned without its parent POM, because the parent could not be read, is also listed here with the reason (see Parent POMs)

    • Each list holds up to 200 entries; the number of omitted entries is returned in omitted_items

  • ecosystem_breakdown includes ecosystems with zero findings, to show that they were scanned

  • Informational advisories (Rust): RustSec also publishes notices that are not vulnerabilities: unmaintained (the crate is no longer maintained), unsound (a soundness bug), and notice. Most have no fixed version. When every advisory in a group is such a notice (every related ID, including aliases, must have its details available and be a notice of a known kind; otherwise it is treated as a vulnerability), the vulnerability has informational set to its kind, is listed after the vulnerabilities of the package, and is counted in informational_count (and in ecosystem_breakdown) instead of vulnerability_count, severity_breakdown, and vulnerable_package_count. If another database (such as GitHub's) lists the same issue as a vulnerability, it stays a vulnerability. informational_count appears only when there is at least one

  • dependency_relation shows whether a package is a direct (direct) or transitive (transitive) dependency. OSV-Scanner does not report this, so the server determines it from validated manifest data and scanned copies:

    • package-lock.json (v2 or later): dependencies of the root and workspace package.json files, resolved with Node's lookup rules (nested node_modules first, then parent directories), are direct; everything reachable from them is transitive. Direct dependencies list the package.json files that declare them in declared_in; transitive dependencies list the direct dependencies that require them in introduced_by (up to 10, with the rest counted in introduced_by_omitted). A version that is both a direct dependency and required by another dependency is direct and also has introduced_by

    • go.mod: require lines without // indirect are direct. Modules affected by a replace directive are marked replaced_in_go_mod: true (OSV-Scanner reports the replacement module and version)

    • requirements.txt: dependencies written in the file are direct; dependencies resolved through deps.dev are transitive

    • pom.xml: OSV-Scanner reports the dependencies declared in pom.xml (and its parent POMs) and the transitive dependencies resolved through deps.dev as separate results (source.type lockfile / unknown), and this split is used (so parent POMs, profiles, properties, and dependency management are interpreted exactly as OSV-Scanner does). introduced_by / declared_in are not available. This relies on undocumented OSV-Scanner output, so anything unexpected is reported as unknown

    • Cargo.lock: crates.io dependencies immediately required by a local/workspace/path crate are direct; crates.io dependencies reachable through them (including git and alternate-registry origins) are transitive. introduced_by names the first direct dependency on each path. References are resolved by exact name, version, and source where provided; ambiguous references are not guessed. Replacements are followed. declared_in lists project-relative Cargo.toml paths only when every declaring crate has a unique matching manifest. Otherwise declaring_crates names the unmapped declaring crates (up to 10, with the rest in declaring_crates_omitted). Dev/build/target-specific distinctions are unavailable. Traversal over 2,000,000 edges returns unknown

    • Other formats (gradle.lockfile, yarn.lock, pnpm-lock.yaml, bun.lock, poetry.lock, uv.lock, Pipfile.lock, and pdm.lock), npm lockfile version 1, and entries not reachable from the project are unknown. If lockfiles disagree, the value is mixed

  • dependency_groups is the raw dependency group reported by OSV-Scanner (for example dev). It is missing or inaccurate for some lockfile formats (absent for pnpm, optional for pdm, and so on), so treat it as informational

  • Upgrade recommendations (suggest_fix) are available for Maven, npm, PyPI, Go, and Rust (crates.io)

scan_java_project

Scans a Java (Maven) project and returns a known-vulnerability report.

Input

Parameter

Type

Description

project_path

string

Absolute path to the project directory, or to a pom.xml / gradle.lockfile

Gradle projects: Only the lockfile approach is supported (running the build would execute arbitrary code in build.gradle, so it is not used for security reasons). If there is no gradle.lockfile, generate one with ./gradlew dependencies --write-locks (if dependency locking is not configured, add dependencyLocking { lockAllConfigurations() } to build.gradle).

Scan scope: For a directory, every pom.xml / gradle.lockfile / buildscript-gradle.lockfile below it is detected regardless of depth, and only the detected files are scanned (manifests in the response is exactly the scan scope). Non-Java files in the same directories, such as package-lock.json and requirements.txt, are not scanned. .git, node_modules, target, build, .idea, .vscode, and symbolic links are not searched. If the search visits more than 200,000 entries or finds more than 1,000 manifests, manifest_search_limit_exceeded is returned instead of silently truncating the results. When a manifest such as pom.xml is given directly, the directory is not searched and only that file is scanned (also useful as a workaround when the limits are reached).

Parent POMs

OSV-Scanner reads the parent POM referenced by <parent> in pom.xml (the file at <relativePath>, or ../pom.xml by default as in Maven), follows the chain to its own parents, and includes the dependencies declared there. This is why scanning a submodule alone still detects the dependencies it inherits.

When OSV_MCP_ALLOWED_ROOT is set, a pom.xml whose parent POM chain references a file outside the allowed root at any point is excluded from the scan (so that the contents of files outside the allowed root never reach the results or the lookup services). Excluded files are listed with the reason in skipped_manifests (coverage.skipped_files in scan_project), and scope_warning says that zero findings should not be taken as safe. If every manifest is excluded, or such a pom.xml is given directly, path_outside_allowed_root is returned.

If an existing parent POM cannot be read (larger than 10 MiB, not a regular file such as a named pipe, a symbolic link at the final path component, and so on), the pom.xml is scanned without it, and the possibly missing inherited dependencies are reported with the reason in incomplete_manifests (coverage.skipped_files in scan_project, with coverage.complete set to false). If the child pom.xml itself declares no dependencies and the scan ends with no_packages_found, the error message includes the same reason. A parent POM that does not exist (for example the default ../pom.xml of a root pom.xml) is not reported, because OSV-Scanner would not read it from the original location either.

  • Parent POMs inside the allowed root are still read (scanning submodules inside the allowed root keeps working)

  • <relativePath/> (empty) does not reference a local parent POM and is ignored

  • The parent reference is read the way OSV-Scanner's (Go) XML decoder reads it: elements are matched by local name regardless of namespace prefix (<m:parent> counts as a parent), only a parent directly under the root element is used, and character references are expanded

  • As the XML specification requires, line endings (CRLF and CR) are normalized to LF before parsing

  • A pom.xml is excluded when the same interpretation cannot be guaranteed: multiple parent or relativePath elements directly under the root, CDATA, a DOCTYPE, unknown entity references, property references (${...}), unclosed tags, content that is not valid UTF-8, or a relativePath containing control characters (newlines, tabs, and so on), whitespace other than a regular space, or format characters (regular spaces and non-ASCII directory names are allowed)

  • OSV-Scanner does not read a parent whose GAV does not match, but this server does not check the GAV and excludes any existing reference outside the allowed root, to stay on the safe side

  • When OSV_MCP_ALLOWED_ROOT is not set, any absolute path can be scanned anyway, so this check is not performed

Output (success)

{
  "project_dir": "/path/to/project",
  "manifests": ["pom.xml"],
  "dependency_resolution": { "transitive_resolution": "enabled" },
  "source_files": ["/path/to/project/pom.xml"],
  "vulnerable_package_count": 4,
  "vulnerability_count": 14,
  "severity_breakdown": { "critical": 3, "high": 3, "medium": 7, "low": 0, "unknown": 1 },
  "packages": [
    {
      "name": "org.apache.logging.log4j:log4j-core",
      "version": "2.14.1",
      "ecosystem": "Maven",
      "vulnerabilities": [
        {
          "id": "GHSA-jfh8-c2jp-5v3q",
          "cve": "CVE-2021-44228",
          "aliases": ["CVE-2021-44228"],
          "severity_score": 10,
          "severity": "critical",
          "summary": "Remote code injection in Log4j",
          "fixed_versions": ["2.3.1", "2.12.2", "2.15.0"]
        }
      ]
    }
  ]
}
  • packages is sorted by the most severe vulnerability, and each vulnerabilities list by severity (unknown last)

  • fixed_versions lists the fixed versions recorded in OSV, in ascending order: by Maven precedence for Maven, Semantic Versioning precedence for npm, Go, and Rust (values that are not valid SemVer come last), and PEP 440 for PyPI (in the order listed by OSV up to v0.5.0); other ecosystems keep the order listed by OSV (the order is not guaranteed). Several release lines may be mixed (for example a 2.12 backport and the 2.15 line). Pre-releases (5.0.0-beta.3) and Go pseudo-versions (0.0.0-20180925071336-cf3bd585ca2a) may be included. An empty array means that OSV lists no fixed version. Up to v0.4.1, this was always empty for packages outside Maven

  • Vulnerabilities without a severity score are reported as null / "unknown"

scan_java_artifact

Scans JAR/WAR archives themselves. This is a separate tool from the manifest-based scans.

{ "artifact_path": "/absolute/path/to/application.war" }

artifact_path is the absolute path to a JAR/WAR file, or to a directory to search. A directory search includes target and build, and excludes .git, node_modules, .idea, .vscode, and symbolic links. The search is limited to a depth of 8, 100 archives, and 10,000 entries. If the search cannot complete within the limits, artifact_search_limit_exceeded is returned instead of silently truncating the results; narrow the target and try again. OSV_MCP_ALLOWED_ROOT applies as well.

OSV-Scanner's java/archive plugin is used, and nested JARs are also analyzed by the scanner. No Java code is executed and no build is run. Identification relies on metadata inside the archives, so dependencies whose metadata was removed, and dependencies inside shaded/minimized JARs, may be missed.

Reading the output:

  • coverage comes first, with jars_found, jars_identified, and unidentified_jars. The counts are per outer archive found on the file system (including WARs), not the total number of nested JARs.

  • artifacts[].status is one of identified_with_vulnerabilities / identified_without_known_vulnerabilities / inferred_only / unidentified. "Identified" means that at least one Maven coordinate was found, not that every dependency was identified. inferred_only is an archive identified only through inferred coordinates (see below). Even when vulnerabilities are found for it, it is not counted in jars_identified and is listed in unidentified_jars with a hint (its findings are shown in identified_vulnerability_count), because wrong inferred groupIds may hide other vulnerabilities.

  • Inferred coordinates: For JARs without pom.properties (such as the main Spring Framework JARs), OSV-Scanner infers the Maven coordinates from file names and similar clues, and often gets the groupId wrong (for example spring-beans:spring-beans instead of org.springframework:spring-beans). Vulnerabilities are not matched for wrong coordinates, so known vulnerabilities are missed (for example, Spring4Shell (CVE-2022-22965) in spring-beans 5.3.2 inside the zipkin-server 2.23.2 fat JAR is not detected). Coordinates whose groupId contains no . are treated as inferred and reported in coverage.inferred_coordinates (count, items, and a warning), and the affected packages are marked coordinates_inferred: true. Correct old-style coordinates such as commons-io:commons-io are included as well (erring on the safe side). Wrong inferences that contain a . (such as com.sun.jna:jna) cannot be detected. For accurate results, scan the build's lockfile or pom.xml with scan_project

  • coverage.completeness is always incomplete. identified_vulnerability_count: 0 does not mean the archives are safe.

  • packages lists the vulnerable packages that were identified. The same package and vulnerability found in several archives are counted once in the totals.

  • If no JAR/WAR is found, no_scannable_artifacts is returned. If no archive can be identified, a successful report with a warning is returned.

suggest_fix remains manifest-based only. Because this tool uses an experimental plugin, the flags and the JAR/WAR output format must be re-verified whenever the pinned OSV-Scanner version is updated. Extracting untrusted archives relies on OSV-Scanner's native code. There are timeouts and output limits, but no OS-level memory limit or sandbox is provided.

scan_sbom

Looks up the dependencies recorded in an existing SBOM with OSV-Scanner. It does not generate SBOMs, run builds, or execute JARs.

{ "sbom_path": "/absolute/path/to/release-sbom.json" }
  • Supported formats: UTF-8 JSON CycloneDX 1.4 / 1.5 / 1.6 and SPDX 2.2 / 2.3. XML, SPDX tag-value, and SPDX 3 are not supported.

  • Input: the absolute path to a local regular file of 16 MiB or less. Any file name is accepted; the format is detected from the content. CycloneDX requires a components array and SPDX a packages array. Only the format and main structure are checked, not the full JSON Schema.

  • Identification: Include versioned Package URLs in CycloneDX components[].purl or SPDX packages[].externalRefs, for example pkg:maven/org.apache.logging.log4j/log4j-core@2.14.1. See the OSV-Scanner documentation for details.

  • Safe reading: The allowed root and the size limit (enforced while reading) are checked, and only a private temporary copy is scanned. The original file is never modified, and the copy is deleted on success and failure. If the server is terminated during a scan (SIGTERM/SIGINT/SIGHUP, or the MCP client closing stdin), the copy is deleted and the running OSV-Scanner is stopped before exiting.

coverage comes first in the output.

  • identified_package_count: the number of distinct packages (by name, version, and ecosystem) identified by the scanner, including those without known vulnerabilities.

  • unidentified_packages: packages present in the scanner output but missing a version or other information. Items the scanner itself skipped cannot be listed, so an empty array does not mean everything was checked.

  • status: packages_identified if anything was identified, otherwise no_packages_identified.

  • completeness / artifact_match: both not_verified. Whether the SBOM covers every dependency, and whether it matches the actual build, are not verified.

sbom returns the original file path, the format, the specification version, and the SHA256 of the bytes that were scanned. identified_vulnerability_count and packages contain the findings for the identified dependencies. RustSec informational advisories for crates in the SBOM are counted in informational_count instead (see scan_project). Zero findings does not mean the software is safe. To cover JARs without metadata, prepare an accurate SBOM for that build.

Invalid JSON returns invalid_sbom, an unsupported format unsupported_sbom_format, input over the size limit sbom_too_large, and a missing or unreadable file sbom_not_found. An empty SBOM, or one with no identifiable packages, returns a successful report with a warning. The same timeout, output limit, and concurrency limit as the other tools apply.

suggest_fix

Runs the same detection and scan as scan_project and recommends an upgrade version for each vulnerable package. Recommendations are available for Java (Maven / Gradle), JavaScript (npm), Python (PyPI), Go, and Rust (crates.io). Instead of simply taking the highest fixed version, it picks the fixed version closest to the current release line, falling back through three tiers:

Tier

Meaning

same_minor

A fixed version in the same release line (the smallest change)

major_internal

A fixed version within the same major version (a minor upgrade)

cross_major

A major upgrade is needed (may include breaking changes)

For npm, Go, PyPI, and Rust, the "same release line" is the range a caret (^) treats as compatible (PyPI has no common compatibility rule, but some 0.x packages make breaking changes in minor releases, so the same rule is used; a change of epoch is also cross_major). From 1.0.0 the line is major.minor, as for Maven. For 0.x, only the same 0.minor is the same line, so a minor update (0.3 → 0.4) is cross_major, and for 0.0.x every update is cross_major (SemVer does not guarantee compatibility for 0.x updates).

Input: the same as scan_project (project_path)

Output (success)

{
  "project_dir": "/path/to/project",
  "manifests": ["pom.xml", "web/package-lock.json"],
  "dependency_resolution": { "transitive_resolution": "enabled" },
  "coverage": { "complete": true, "manifests": [ ... ], "lockfile_missing": [], "unpinned_requirements": [], "unscannable_requirements": [], "skipped_files": [] },
  "vulnerable_package_count": 4,
  "unfixed_vulnerability_count": 1,
  "suggestions": [
    {
      "package": "org.apache.logging.log4j:log4j-core",
      "current_version": "2.14.1",
      "ecosystem": "Maven",
      "dependency_relation": "direct",
      "recommended_upgrade": "2.25.4",
      "upgrade_tier": "major_internal",
      "upgrade_note": "…",
      "update_hint": "…",
      "candidate_check": "clean",
      "per_cve_detail": [
        { "id": "GHSA-jfh8-c2jp-5v3q", "cve": "CVE-2021-44228", "severity": "critical", "fixed_in": "2.15.0", "tier": "major_internal", "recommended_status": "not_affected" }
      ],
      "verification": "verified"
    }
  ]
}
  • recommended_upgrade is chosen from the known fixed versions: the first candidate, in tier order and then ascending version order, that is confirmed to be outside the affected ranges of every vulnerability being fixed. It does not simply take the highest fixed version per CVE, and it excludes candidates that are affected again in another release line. It does not guarantee that the candidate is the smallest among all published versions, or that it has no undetected vulnerabilities.

  • The OSV affected ranges (introduced / fixed / last_affected / open-ended) are checked: ECOSYSTEM ranges by Maven precedence for Maven, SEMVER / ECOSYSTEM ranges by Semantic Versioning precedence for npm and Go, and ECOSYSTEM ranges by PEP 440 for PyPI (non-canonical forms such as 1.8c1 and 2.8.0-rc0 are normalized). Events are sorted by version before evaluation, as in the OSV specification's evaluation algorithm. Commit-based GIT ranges are ignored when the same entry has an ECOSYSTEM range. Versions explicitly listed in versions are also checked (values that are not versions, such as Git tag names, are ignored, since they can never equal a valid candidate). If the information is incomplete (missing, malformed, or unsupported ranges such as GIT, limit, or range boundaries that cannot be parsed, such as 19.03.9 in some GHSAs or PyTorch's 2.6.0-cu124), no candidate is assumed to be safe; if no candidate can be verified, recommended_upgrade: null and verification: "no_verified_candidate" are returned.

  • Pre-releases (5.0.0-beta.3, 15.6.0-canary.61, Go pseudo-versions, PyPI rc and dev versions; post-releases count as stable) are recommended only when no stable candidate fixes every vulnerability, and are marked recommended_is_prerelease: true. A stable version in a higher tier is preferred over a pre-release in a lower tier.

  • When a version is recommended, verification is verified, and each CVE's recommended_status is affected / not_affected / unknown (not_evaluated when the recommendation is withheld). per_cve_detail.fixed_in is the candidate for that CVE alone; see recommended_status for the final recommendation.

  • CVEs with no fixed version newer than the current one get tier: "unfixed" and are left out of the recommendation (the data may be incomplete). They are still evaluated against the recommended version, and the result is shown. If every CVE is unfixed, recommended_upgrade is null as well. A CVE whose fixed version is listed but cannot be parsed as a version (such as 13.0, which is not SemVer) gets tier: "unparseable_fix"; it is not treated as unfixed but stays in the set to be fixed, so the recommendation is withheld (no_verified_candidate).

  • Rust uses SemVer (SEMVER ranges) and Cargo caret compatibility: 0.x minor updates and 0.0.x patch updates are cross_major. unmaintained and notice advisories, and unsound advisories without a newer fixed version, remain in per_cve_detail with tier: "informational", their kind, and recommended_status, but are not fix targets or counted as unfixed. An unsound advisory with a newer fixed version is a version-specific defect, so it is a fix target like a vulnerability (its tier is computed normally and it keeps informational: "unsound"). Packages with no fix target left return verification: "informational_only" without an upgrade. Unmaintained crates may need replacement; use explain_vulnerability for notices.

  • Suggestions include an update_hint, tailored to whether the package is a direct or transitive dependency:

    • Maven (from pom.xml): for a direct dependency, update the <dependency> version (or the parent POM, property, or BOM that manages it); for a transitive dependency, override the version in <dependencyManagement> or update the direct dependency that requires it

    • npm: for a direct dependency, update the version in the package.json listed in declared_in; for a transitive dependency, update the direct dependency named in introduced_by, or set the version with overrides in the root package.json (effective only in the root project)

    • Go: go get <module>@<version> (also for // indirect modules). For a module affected by replace, update the version in the replace directive instead of require. Major versions 2 and later use a different module path (/v2 and so on) and are separate packages in OSV, so fixes in a newer major line are not included as candidates. If the current version is a pseudo-version (an untagged commit), upgrade_note says so

    • PyPI: update the version in requirements.txt, pyproject.toml, or Pipfile and regenerate the lockfile; for a transitive dependency, use a pip constraints file (-c) or the override settings of uv or Poetry

    • Rust: where version requirements permit it, cargo update -p <crate>@<current> --precise <recommended> updates the lockfile. Otherwise change the direct requirement in the declaring Cargo.toml or update the parent dependency in introduced_by. Cross-major upgrades may break compatibility, including 0.x updates. Pre-releases may require explicit =<version> requirements and must be allowed by transitive parents. Build metadata is omitted from --precise. [patch.crates-io] changes a source, not the allowed version range; backports must satisfy parent requirements. Check yanked versions, MSRV, and compiler compatibility. Cargo is never executed by the server

    • When the relation is unknown or mixed, both cases are described (no hint is given for Maven packages from gradle.lockfile)

  • Checking recommended versions against OSV: Recommendations are verified only against the vulnerabilities found in the scan (those affecting the current version), so a recommended version could be affected by newer vulnerabilities (for example, cryptography 3.2's candidate 49.0.0 is affected by two vulnerabilities introduced in 44.0.0 and fixed in 50.0.0). The server therefore queries api.osv.dev about the recommended version, and if it is affected, adds those vulnerabilities to the set to be fixed and chooses again with their fixed versions as candidates (50.0.0 in this example, with the reason in upgrade_note). The result is reported in candidate_check:

    • clean: OSV reports no additional fix-target vulnerabilities after excluding known unfixed advisories, known informational advisories that are not fix targets, and new Rust unmaintained / notice records. These advisories may still apply; check per_cve_detail[].recommended_status. Newly discovered unsound records are added as fix targets

    • has_known_vulnerabilities: no candidate avoids them, so the recommended version has known vulnerabilities (IDs in recommended_known_vulnerabilities)

    • conflict: OSV reports that a candidate is affected by a vulnerability the scan had evaluated as not affecting it (the range data disagree), and no other candidate is available, so the recommendation is withheld (recommended_upgrade: null, verification: "no_verified_candidate")

    • failed: the query failed or returned a malformed response (the recommendation, verified against the scanned vulnerabilities, is still returned)

    • skipped: the query limit was reached (4 queries per package, 60 per call)

    • disabled: disabled with OSV_MCP_NO_CANDIDATE_CHECK=1

    Only packages with a recommendation are queried, and only the package name (already sent during the scan) and the candidate version are sent. A candidate on which OSV and the local range data disagree is never recommended. A malformed response (a response or record that is not an object, or a page token that is not a string) is treated as a failure, not as "no vulnerabilities". Vulnerabilities found this way do not affect the current version, so they are not added to per_cve_detail.

  • Each suggestion carries the same dependency_relation as scan_project (and introduced_by / declared_in / replaced_in_go_mod).

  • requirements.txt lines with >=X / ~=X are scanned by OSV-Scanner at the lower bound X. Their suggestions are marked version_is_lower_bound: true, and upgrade_note explains that the recommendation means raising the lower bound to at least the recommended version (the installed version may differ).

  • Ecosystems without recommendation support (such as RubyGems from an SBOM) return verification: "unsupported_ecosystem", and current versions that cannot be parsed (such as npm git or local path dependencies) return verification: "unparseable_version". In both cases each CVE gets tier: "unsupported" and is not counted as unfixed (whether a fixed version exists is not evaluated; check fixed_versions in scan_project or explain_vulnerability).

  • coverage is the same as in scan_project. If a manifest has no lockfile or a file was excluded, complete is false, and those dependencies are not included in the suggestions. The skipped_manifests / scope_warning fields of v0.4.2 and earlier were merged into coverage.skipped_files / coverage.warning.

explain_vulnerability

Returns the details of a vulnerability, given its GHSA or CVE ID, fetched directly from the OSV database API (api.osv.dev) (no scan is run). IDs from the scan results can be passed as they are. This is especially useful for vulnerabilities published after the client LLM's knowledge cutoff.

Input

Parameter

Type

Description

vulnerability_id

string

The vulnerability ID (for example GHSA-jfh8-c2jp-5v3q or CVE-2021-44228)

Output (success): id / aliases / summary / details (markdown description, up to 4,000 characters) / severity (CVSS vectors) / published / modified / affected (affected packages and version ranges) / references (URLs of advisories, fix commits, and so on; http/https only, up to 20)

Note: OSV's canonical IDs are GHSA and similar IDs, so a CVE ID may not be found (the error message then suggests querying with the GHSA ID).

Output (error) — common to all tools

Returns JSON with a machine-readable kind, together with isError: true:

{
  "error": {
    "kind": "no_manifest_found",
    "message": "…"
  }
}

kind

Meaning

binary_not_found

OSV-Scanner was not found (the message includes installation instructions)

project_not_found

The path does not exist, or is not a directory or a supported file

permission_denied

Node's permission model (--permission) does not allow the read or write (the message names the missing permission and the path; see Running with restricted permissions)

no_manifest_found

No supported lockfile or manifest was found (for scan_project, the message includes how to generate missing lockfiles)

manifest_search_limit_exceeded

The manifest search reached its limits (200,000 entries or 1,000 manifests). Specify a narrower directory or the manifest itself

no_scannable_artifacts

No JAR/WAR archive was found (scan_java_artifact)

artifact_search_limit_exceeded

The JAR/WAR search reached its limits (depth 8, 100 archives, 10,000 entries). Narrow the target

scan_input_too_large

The total size of the files to scan (the copies in the temporary directory) exceeds the limit (2 GiB). Narrow the target

sbom_not_found

The SBOM file does not exist, is not a regular file, or cannot be read

invalid_sbom

The SBOM is not valid JSON or lacks the required structure

unsupported_sbom_format

The SBOM format or version is not supported

sbom_too_large

The SBOM exceeds the size limit (16 MiB)

binary_download_failed

The binary download failed (including unsupported platforms)

binary_checksum_mismatch

The downloaded binary's checksum does not match (possible tampering or corruption)

gradle_lockfile_missing

A Gradle project without gradle.lockfile (scan_java_project; the message explains how to generate it)

path_outside_allowed_root

The path is outside OSV_MCP_ALLOWED_ROOT (including when every manifest is excluded because its parent POM references a file outside the allowed root)

no_packages_found

No packages to scan (for example a pom.xml without dependencies)

scan_failed

OSV-Scanner exited abnormally (an excerpt of stderr is in detail)

scan_timeout

Timeout (120 seconds by default)

too_many_concurrent_scans

The concurrent scan limit (2 by default) was reached. Try again after the running scans finish

output_too_large

The output exceeds the size limit (32 MB by default)

invalid_output

The output could not be parsed as JSON

invalid_vulnerability_id

The vulnerability ID is malformed

vulnerability_not_found

No vulnerability with the ID exists in the OSV database

api_request_failed

The request to the OSV API failed (network, timeout, or a non-2xx response)

internal_error

An unexpected error (no internal details are returned)

Security design

The following measures keep the vulnerability scanner itself from becoming an attack vector.

  • Supply chain: The automatic download is limited to the official GitHub Releases and a pinned version, and is verified against a SHA256 checksum embedded in the package (the SHA256SUMS file from the release is not trusted, so tampering on the release side is detected). The binary is not made executable until it passes verification, and cached binaries are verified again on every use. OSV_MCP_PREFER_DOWNLOAD=1 avoids unverified binaries on PATH

  • Command injection: Commands are run with spawn and an argument array, never through a shell. OSV-Scanner receives only a fixed list of arguments, plus verified absolute paths

  • Snapshots (no gap between checking and reading): OSV-Scanner never receives the original files. Lockfiles, pom.xml (including the parent POM chain), and JAR/WARs are read safely once, copied into a private temporary directory (accessible only by the owner, deleted afterwards), and the copies are both checked and scanned. Replacing the original files or directories after the check has no effect on the results. Parent POMs are copied into the temporary directory at their original relative positions, so OSV-Scanner can follow relative paths but only finds the verified copies (references that climb out of the temporary directory with repeated .. are excluded). Reads refuse a symbolic link at the final path component and anything that is not a regular file (so named pipes cannot stall the server), and afterwards the path is resolved again to confirm that it is still inside the boundary and is the same file that was opened. The copies are limited to 2 GiB in total (scan_input_too_large). When the server is terminated (SIGTERM/SIGINT/SIGHUP, or stdin closing), the temporary directories are deleted and running OSV-Scanner processes are stopped. Directories left behind by an uncatchable termination such as SIGKILL are deleted at a later startup (only directories whose names exactly match this server's prefixes, owned by the current user, not symbolic links, and unmodified for 24 hours or more)

  • Path traversal: Input paths are resolved with realpath (following symbolic links) before the boundary check. Manifest searches do not follow symbolic links. OSV-Scanner never receives a directory, only the detected manifests, each with its format given explicitly (given a directory, OSV-Scanner also reads requirements.txt files there and follows their -r ../x.txt includes outside the scan scope). requirements.txt files are not passed as they are: only the dependency lines the server could interpret are normalized and written to a private copy without any include directives, so even if OSV-Scanner's interpretation of includes differs from the server's, files outside the scope are never read. Cargo.lock files are likewise replaced by a copy the server writes, listing only crates.io packages A pom.xml whose parent POM chain references a file outside OSV_MCP_ALLOWED_ROOT is excluded (Parent POMs)

  • Denial of service: Timeouts and limits on stdout and on the stderr excerpt. Scanner output is parsed defensively and malformed output does not throw. The number of concurrent scans is limited (2 by default) so that parallel requests cannot start unlimited processes. The server's own analysis reads each file once and reuses the result (lockfiles for npm workspace membership, Cargo.lock files, shared requirements.txt includes, parent POMs), with a limit on the total amount read. Responses do not include the internal affected-range data, which keeps large scans to a fraction of their former size

  • Fail-closed mode: OSV_MCP_REQUIRE_ALLOWED_ROOT=1 refuses to start the server when no allowed root is set

  • Restricted permissions (optional): The server works under Node's permission model, reports denied access as permission_denied, and warns about missing permissions at startup (Running with restricted permissions)

  • Fixed and documented network destinations: Dependency resolution is set to deps.dev explicitly, and the mode that connects to arbitrary repositories listed in the scanned pom.xml (--data-source native) is never used (guaranteed by tests). See Network destinations and privacy for the destinations and for OSV_MCP_NO_REMOTE_RESOLUTION=1, which stops sending data to deps.dev

  • Information leakage: Unexpected exceptions are reduced to internal_error without stack traces. Text from external sources (vulnerability summaries and so on) is returned as length-limited, structured data

  • Prompt injection: Text from the OSV database (summary / details / IDs and so on) and OSV-Scanner's stderr are sanitized before being returned to the LLM client. Control characters (including ANSI escapes), zero-width characters, bidirectional control characters (such as RLO), Unicode tag characters (invisible text smuggling), and line separators (U+2028/2029) are removed, and NFC normalization is applied. All reads of external data go through a single sanitizing boundary, so nothing is missed

Development

npm test                  # run the tests (vitest)
npx vitest run --coverage # measure coverage
npm run typecheck         # type check
npm run build             # build into dist/

Design notes and open items are in docs/DESIGN_TODO.md (in Japanese). Release notes are in docs/releases.

Roadmap

  • suggest_fix: recommends the fix closest to the current release line (three-tier fallback)

  • explain_vulnerability: vulnerability details (through the OSV API)

  • npm package (npx osv-scanner-mcp)

  • Automatic OSV-Scanner download (with checksum verification)

  • Gradle support (lockfile approach)

  • scan_java_artifact: JAR/WAR scanning (for projects without a lockfile, or with only shaded/fat JARs)

  • scan_project: scans Java / JavaScript / Python / Go lockfiles together

  • suggest_fix for JavaScript / Go (SemVer)

  • suggest_fix for Python (PEP 440)

  • Direct and transitive dependencies (npm, Go, requirements.txt, pom.xml)

  • Checking recommended versions against the OSV database

  • Flagging inferred coordinates in JAR/WAR scans

  • Running under Node's permission model

  • English tool descriptions and messages

  • scan_project for Rust (Cargo.lock, crates.io crates only) and RustSec informational advisories

  • suggest_fix and direct/transitive dependencies for Rust

  • Direct and transitive dependencies for gradle.lockfile and the YAML/TOML lockfiles

License

Apache License 2.0

Available Tools

6 tools
explain_vulnerability脆弱性の詳細説明の取得A

指定したGHSA-IDまたはCVE-IDの脆弱性の詳細をOSVデータベース(api.osv.dev)から取得して返す。説明(details)・CVSSベクトル・影響を受けるパッケージとバージョン範囲・参照リンク(アドバイザリや修正コミット)が含まれる。scan_java_projectやsuggest_fixの結果に含まれるIDをそのまま渡せる。スキャンは実行しない。

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
vulnerability_idYes脆弱性のID(例: GHSA-jfh8-c2jp-5v3q、CVE-2021-44228)

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that the tool performs an external API lookup, returns specific data fields, and does not execute scanning, which are the key behavioral traits an agent needs. It does not mention potential network failures or rate limits, but for a read-only lookup tool, the disclosed behavior is sufficient.

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?

The description is three concise sentences in Japanese, starting with the core action, then the returned fields, then usage context and a clear non-scan caveat. Every sentence earns its place with no fluff or duplication of schema details.

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?

Given the simple one-parameter interface, the fully self-describing input schema, and the absence of an output schema, the description is complete enough. It explains the data source, the input, the output fields, the relationship to sibling tools, and the key behavioral constraint (no scanning), so an agent can invoke it correctly without additional information.

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?

The schema already documents vulnerability_id with examples and length constraints (100% coverage). The description adds valuable semantic context by stating that IDs from scan_java_project or suggest_fix can be passed directly, which helps the agent understand the expected value and provenance of the parameter.

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?

The description states a specific action ('取得して返す' fetch and return), a specific resource (OSV database at api.osv.dev), and the input type (GHSA-ID or CVE-ID). It explicitly lists the returned contents (details, CVSS, affected packages, references), which clearly distinguishes this from the sibling scan_java_project and suggest_fix tools.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description clearly indicates this tool is for retrieving vulnerability details from IDs obtained via scan_java_project or suggest_fix, and explicitly states that scanning is not performed. This gives an agent clear contextual guidance on when to invoke it, though it does not explicitly state 'when not to use' for all alternatives.

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

scan_java_artifactJAR/WAR実体の脆弱性スキャンA

JAR/WARファイルまたはディレクトリ内の実体をスキャンする。ビルドやJavaコードの実行は行わない。メタデータによるベストエフォート同定のため、coverageと同定不能ファイルを必ず確認すること。completenessは常にincomplete。検出0件でも安全性や全依存の同定を保証しない。

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
artifact_pathYesJAR/WARファイル、または探索するディレクトリの絶対パス

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It transparently discloses that no build or code execution occurs, that identification is best-effort based on metadata, that completeness is always incomplete, and that zero findings do not guarantee safety. This is strong behavioral transparency, though it does not describe return format or pagination.

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 concise sentences, each adding value: the action, what it avoids, and critical result-interpretation caveats. The most important information is front-loaded, with no fluff or repetition.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given the single parameter and lack of output schema, the description explains key limitations (coverage, incompleteness, no guarantee) that an agent needs to correctly interpret results. It does not detail the output structure, but the caveats about coverage and unidentifiable files imply the output contains these, which is sufficient for safe usage.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, and the description does not add details beyond what the schema already states for artifact_path. It aligns with the schema's description of the parameter, but no extra semantics are provided.

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?

The description clearly states the tool scans entities inside JAR/WAR files or directories, explicitly distinguishing it from source-level scanning (scan_java_project) and noting it does not execute builds or Java code. The verb+resource combination is specific and unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied by the resource type (JAR/WAR vs. source code), but there is no explicit mention of when to use this over scan_sbom or scan_java_project. The description does provide guidance on interpreting results (check coverage, unidentifiable files) but lacks explicit alternative routing.

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

scan_java_projectJavaプロジェクトの脆弱性スキャンA

Java(Maven)プロジェクトをGoogle OSV-Scannerでスキャンし、依存ライブラリの既知の脆弱性(CVE/GHSA)を深刻度順のJSONレポートで返す。レポートにはパッケージごとの脆弱性一覧(CVSSスコア・5段階深刻度・修正版バージョン)とサマリ集計が含まれる。Maven(pom.xml)とGradle(gradle.lockfile)に対応。dependency_resolution.warningがある場合は推移的依存がスキャン対象外のため、検出0件でも安全とは判断しないこと。

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_pathYesスキャン対象のプロジェクトディレクトリ、またはpom.xml/gradle.lockfileの絶対パス

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the scan engine, the report shape (per-package vulnerability list with CVSS score, 5-level severity, fixed version, plus summary aggregates), and a critical non-obvious caveat that a transitivity warning invalidates a zero-finding result. It omits operational traits such as network dependency on the OSV API, credentials, or runtime expectations, which keeps it short of a 5.

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?

Four sentences, each load-bearing: purpose plus report format, report contents, supported build systems, and the safety caveat. The purpose is front-loaded and there is no filler or repetition.

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

Completeness4/5

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

There is no output schema, so the description must describe returns and it does so concretely (severity-ordered JSON, CVSS, severity level, fixed versions, summary aggregation). Combined with the transitive-dependency caveat, an agent has enough to call and interpret the tool, though environment prerequisites (network access, scan duration) are not addressed.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100% and there is only one parameter (project_path), whose meaning is fully documented in the schema itself as a project directory or absolute path to pom.xml/gradle.lockfile. The description adds no syntax, path-form, or default detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description names a specific verb and resource (scanning a Java/Maven project with Google OSV-Scanner) and states exactly what is returned (known CVEs/GHSA in severity-ordered JSON). It narrows scope with supported build systems (pom.xml, gradle.lockfile), which implicitly separates it from scan_sbom and scan_java_artifact. However, it never names or contrasts a sibling explicitly, so an agent must infer the boundary against scan_project and scan_java_artifact.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use statement or named alternative. Usage is only implied by the supported inputs (Maven pom.xml, Gradle gradle.lockfile), and the closing caveat tells the agent not to conclude safety when dependency_resolution.warning is present. That is useful operational guidance but not sibling routing.

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

scan_projectプロジェクトの依存の脆弱性スキャン(Java / JavaScript / Python / Go)A

プロジェクト内のlockfile・マニフェストを検出し、依存ライブラリの既知の脆弱性(CVE/GHSA)をまとめてスキャンする。対応: Java(pom.xml / gradle.lockfile)、JavaScript(package-lock.json / npm-shrinkwrap.json / yarn.lock / pnpm-lock.yaml / bun.lock)、Python(poetry.lock / uv.lock / Pipfile.lock / pdm.lock / requirements.txt)、Go(go.mod)。パッケージマネージャーやビルドは実行しない。応答先頭のcoverageを必ず確認すること: lockfileが無いマニフェスト、バージョン未固定のrequirements行、スキャン対象から外したファイルを示す。各パッケージのdependency_relationは直接依存(direct)か推移的依存(transitive)か(package-lock.json・go.mod・requirements.txtで判定。それ以外はunknown)。coverage.complete=falseの場合は、検出0件でも安全とは判断しないこと。修正版の推奨(suggest_fix)はJava・JavaScript・Python・Goに対応。

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_pathYesスキャン対象のプロジェクトディレクトリ、または対応するlockfile・マニフェストの絶対パス

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does so well: it states that package managers/builds are NOT executed, explains the coverage block (manifests without lockfiles, unpinned requirement lines, excluded files), and defines dependency_relation as direct/transitive/unknown with which files yield which. It omits any note on permissions or runtime cost, keeping it from a 5.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loaded with the core purpose, then proceeds through supported files, behavioral caveats, and the coverage warning in a logical order. It is dense and somewhat long, but each clause adds operational detail rather than filler.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With no output schema, the description must explain the return shape, and it does specify the leading coverage object, its false case, and per-package dependency_relation. The picture is largely complete, though the exact findings format and suggest_fix linkage to the separate sibling are left implicit.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100% for the single project_path parameter, and the description adds no new semantics beyond what the schema already states (directory or absolute lockfile/manifest path). Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb+resource (detect lockfiles/manifests and scan dependencies for known CVE/GHSA vulnerabilities) and enumerates the supported ecosystems and exact filenames, which is unusually precise. However, it never distinguishes itself from overlapping siblings like scan_sbom and scan_java_project, which an agent must choose between, so it falls short of a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It implicitly defines when to use it by listing the ecosystems and file types it handles, and it gives a critical caution about coverage.complete=false. But it offers no explicit routing versus scan_sbom, scan_java_project, or scan_java_artifact, so the agent cannot tell when this tool is preferred over those.

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

scan_sbomSBOMの脆弱性スキャンA

CycloneDX 1.4/1.5/1.6またはSPDX 2.2/2.3のJSON SBOMから識別できる依存をスキャンする。ビルドやJARの実行は行わない。入力は16MiB以下のローカルファイル。SBOMの網羅性・鮮度・実成果物との一致は未検証であり、検出0件でも安全性を保証しない。

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sbom_pathYesCycloneDX/SPDX JSON SBOMファイルの絶対パス

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does an excellent job: it discloses that only SBOM-identifiable dependencies are scanned, that builds/JARs are not executed, that SBOM comprehensiveness/freshness/artifact-match are unverified, and that zero detections do not guarantee safety. These limitations are highly useful for an agent deciding how to interpret results.

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?

The description is compact, front-loaded with the core scanning behavior and supported formats, and every sentence adds operational value. It states scope, exclusions, input constraints, and key limitations without redundancy or padding.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a single-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is quite complete: input format, size, local-file requirement, non-execution behavior, and result caveats are all covered. The main gap is that it does not describe the return value or output structure of the scan, which would help an agent know what to expect after calling it.

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?

The input schema already defines sbom_path as an absolute path to a CycloneDX/SPDX JSON SBOM file, with 100% coverage. The description adds meaningful constraints beyond the schema: supported format versions, the 16MiB size limit, and that the input must be a local file, which helps the agent validate the parameter before calling the tool.

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?

The description uses a specific verb ('スキャンする') and resource ('CycloneDX 1.4/1.5/1.6またはSPDX 2.2/2.3のJSON SBOM'), and states what is scanned: dependencies identifiable from the SBOM. It is clearly distinguished from siblings like scan_java_project and scan_java_artifact by focusing on an SBOM file input rather than a project or artifact.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description establishes clear usage context: this tool is for scanning a local JSON SBOM file, with a 16MiB size limit, and explicitly says it does not build or execute JARs. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the input constraints and non-execution note make the intended scenario reasonably clear.

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

suggest_fix脆弱性を解消する推奨アップグレードの提案A

scan_projectと同じ検出でプロジェクトをスキャンし、脆弱な依存パッケージごとに推奨アップグレードバージョンを提案する。推奨はJava(Maven / Gradle)・JavaScript(npm)・Python(PyPI)・Goに対応。現在のバージョンに最も近いリリース系統の修正版を優先する3段階フォールバック(same_minor: 同一系統内 → major_internal: 同一メジャー内 → cross_major: メジャーアップグレード)で選定し、推奨バージョン・アップグレード距離(upgrade_tier)・CVEごとの修正版を返す。npm・Go・PyPIでは0.x系のマイナー更新もcross_major(破壊的変更の可能性)。requirements.txtの下限(>=)でスキャンした依存はversion_is_lower_boundを付け、推奨は下限の引き上げを意味する。直接/推移的依存の別(dependency_relation、npmはintroduced_by・declared_in)に応じて更新方法(update_hint)を示す。推奨先はapi.osv.devに照会し、現在の版には該当しない既知の脆弱性があれば避けて選び直す(結果はcandidate_check。has_known_vulnerabilities・failed・skippedの場合は推奨先の安全性が確認できていない。conflictは判定の食い違いで推奨を保留)。候補を全修正対象CVEの影響範囲と照合し、情報不足の場合は推奨を保留する。プレリリース版は正式版で解消できない場合だけ推奨し、recommended_is_prereleaseを付ける。現在より新しい修正版候補のないCVEはunfixedとして別表示し、推奨先での判定も返す。応答のcoverageを必ず確認すること(complete=falseなら提案に含まれない依存がある)。dependency_resolution.warningがある場合は推移的依存の脆弱性が提案に含まれない。

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_pathYesスキャン対象のプロジェクトディレクトリ、または対応するlockfile・マニフェストの絶対パス

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations to carry the load, the description discloses substantial behavior: the three-tier fallback selection (same_minor/major_internal/cross_major), candidate_check safety re-query against api.osv.dev, handling of prerelase and unfixed CVEs, coverage and dependency_resolution.warning caveats. This is exactly the kind of behavioral context an agent needs for a complex remediation tool.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence and nearly every subsequent sentence conveys distinct behavioral detail, so little is wasted. However it is delivered as one dense unbroken paragraph with no structuring, which makes the rich detail harder to scan than it needs to be.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the return semantics extensively (upgrade_tier, version_is_lower_bound, dependency_relation/update_hint, recommended_is_prerelease, candidate_check, unfixed, coverage). An agent has everything needed to interpret results and handle caveats correctly.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100% and there is a single parameter, so the schema already documents project_path fully; the description adds no extra meaning about the parameter. Baseline of 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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: it scans the project with the same detection as scan_project and proposes a recommended upgrade version per vulnerable dependency. It explicitly names the sibling scan_project and clarifies how it differs (same scan, plus fix recommendations), so an agent can distinguish it from the other scan_* tools.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied through the reference to scan_project (same detection, but adds remediation) and post-call guidance to verify coverage, but there is no explicit when/when-not statement or alternative routing (e.g. when to prefer scan_project or explain_vulnerability). It is enough to infer intent but leaves the choice among siblings to the agent.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

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

  1. 2 tool updatesv0.7.1
    • Addedscan_project
    • Changedsuggest_fix1 field changed
      • changedInput schema / properties / project_path / description
        Previous value: -"スキャン対象のプロジェクトディレクトリ、またはpom.xml/gradle.lockfileの絶対パス"New value: +"スキャン対象のプロジェクトディレクトリ、または対応するlockfile・マニフェストの絶対パス"
  2. 2 tool updatesv0.3.0
    • Addedscan_java_artifact
    • Addedscan_sbom
  3. 3 tool updatesv0.1.11
    • Addedexplain_vulnerability
    • Changedscan_java_project1 field changed
      • changedInput schema / properties / project_path / description
        Previous value: -"スキャン対象のプロジェクトディレクトリまたはpom.xmlの絶対パス"New value: +"スキャン対象のプロジェクトディレクトリ、またはpom.xml/gradle.lockfileの絶対パス"
    • Addedsuggest_fix
  4. 1 tool updatev0.1.0
    • First observedscan_java_project

TDQS

A4/5.0

Scored across 6 tools

Disambiguation3/5

scan_project, scan_java_project, and suggest_fix all perform project scanning, and scan_project already covers Java Maven/Gradle, making scan_java_project largely redundant. scan_java_artifact and scan_sbom are distinct by input type, but the boundary between generic and Java-specific project scans is fuzzy.

Naming Consistency5/5

All names use snake_case and follow a clear verb_noun or verb_object pattern such as scan_*, explain_*, and suggest_*. Minor ordering variation in scan_java_project versus scan_project is readable and consistent overall.

Tool Count5/5

Six tools is well-scoped for a vulnerability scanner and remediation server. Each tool covers a distinct input type or action without obvious bloat.

Completeness4/5

The core lifecycle is covered: scanning projects, Java artifacts, and SBOMs; explaining individual vulnerabilities; and suggesting fixes. Some gaps remain, such as no general non-Java artifact scanning or batch fix application, but agents can work around these.

Maintenance

ActivityActive
ResponsivenessNo issues

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

  • A
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    Not graded
    maintenance
    Enables security scanning of code projects to identify common vulnerabilities like XSS, injections, SSRF, and path traversal issues. Provides local, offline scanning with severity-grouped results and actionable fix suggestions for improving code security.
    38 npm
    -