MCP Risk

Directory / server

ai.reka/mcp

This directory entry reports an automated security scan of ai.reka/mcp, scanned 2026-07-28. Trust grade C rates provenance, transport, known vulnerabilities and instruction integrity; capability risk is reported separately, not folded into the grade.

registry.modelcontextprotocol.io, scanned 2026-07-28, tool surface via remote-tools-list

C 72/100 permalink

Automated checks

StatusCheckPolicyResult
PASS Listed on the official MCP registry §1.1
Listed on registry.modelcontextprotocol.io as ai.reka/mcp. 1 finding
  • Registry entry: ai.reka/mcp ↗
WARN Source repository is public and maintained §1.2

No public source repository could be identified for this server.
WARN Published package is consistent and attested §1.3
Minor integrity gaps: no PyPI trusted-publishing provenance. 5 findings
  • Package: reka-mcp@0.1.10 ↗
  • Ecosystem: PyPI
  • Age: 90 days
  • Repo field matches source repo: n/a
  • Trusted-publishing provenance: absent
PASS Tool surface is inspectable and proportionate §2.1–§2.4
17 tool(s) enumerated; no high-risk capability signals. 2 findings
  • Tools exposed: 17
  • Detected capabilities: none
PASS HTTPS-only endpoint §3.1
Endpoint uses HTTPS. 1 finding
  • Endpoint: https://mcp.reka.ai/mcp
UNVERIFIABLE Authentication required §3.2

Endpoint rejected the probe (HTTP 400); whether it requires authentication could not be determined.
WARN OAuth protected-resource metadata published §3.3
No protected-resource metadata found - clients cannot discover the authorization server per spec. 1 finding
  • Checked: https://mcp.reka.ai/.well-known/oauth-protected-resource
PASS No known vulnerabilities (OSV.dev) §4.1

No advisories on record for reka-mcp @0.1.10 (PyPI).
WARN Server-supplied instructions free of poisoning indicators §5.1–§5.4
1 suspicious indicator(s) found in server-supplied instructions, tool descriptions, or schemas. 1 finding
  • ask_video: imperative to the model: you should first
What this grade covers
  • Provenance & supply-chain integrity (§1)
  • Tool surface & capability risk (§2)
  • Transport & authentication (§3)
  • Known CVEs via OSV.dev (§4)
  • Instruction/tool poisoning patterns (§5)

Limitations: pattern-based only (no semantic injection detection), static npm analysis (live server instructions not retrieved for package-only scans), single-server scope (no cross-server toxic flow analysis). See the full policy.

Methodology: MCP Server Security Policy. Unfamiliar term? See the glossary.