io.github.satelliteoflove/godot-mcp

What we checked

Six static checks, weighted by risk. Every result reflects only what could be observed in the published package and repository — never intent.

• Injection surface

  warn25% of grade

  Tool descriptions/manifest scanned for instruction-injection patterns (imperatives at the model, hidden text, 'ignore previous', data-exfil URLs).

  tool "godot_input" param "screenshot_max_width" description: imperative telling the model it must read/send/attach something.

• Supply chain

  pass25% of grade

  Package provenance: namespace verification, repo linkage, maintainer count, account age, postinstall scripts, typosquat distance.

  repository linkage verified

• Credential hygiene

  pass15% of grade

  How the server takes secrets (env vs plaintext config vs hardcoded); secrets appearing in tool schemas.

  No hardcoded secrets, secret-shaped tool parameters, or leaked keys found. PASS = no static red flag; static analysis cannot prove the code honors env-based secret handling at runtime.

• Permission scope

  pass15% of grade

  Declared tools vs. breadth (filesystem, network, exec); flags shell-exec and unbounded filesystem access.

  No shell-exec, unbounded/sensitive filesystem, or download-and-run primitives found in scanned source. PASS = no static red flag. Static scanning is blind to code fetched or executed at runtime.

• Version behavior

  fail10% of grade

  Diff of tool definitions between versions; new permissions or changed descriptions in a patch release (the postmark-mcp class).

  vs prior 4.1.9 (patch bump): new tool "godot_scene" touches a sensitive surface (email/exec/net/fs); new tool "godot_node_read" touches a sensitive surface (email/exec/net/fs); new tool "godot_node_edit" touches a sensitive surface (email/exec/net/fs); new tool "godot_editor_read" touches a sensitive surface (email/exec/net/fs); new tool "godot_editor_edit" touches a sensitive surface (email/exec/net/fs); new tool "godot_project" touches a sensitive surface (email/exec/net/fs); new tool "godot_animation_read" touches a sensitive surface (email/exec/net/fs); new tool "godot_animation_edit" touches a sensitive surface (email/exec/net/fs); new tool "godot_tilemap_read" touches a sensitive surface (email/exec/net/fs); new tool "godot_tilemap_edit" touches a sensitive surface (email/exec/net/fs); new tool "godot_gridmap_read" touches a sensitive surface (email/exec/net/fs); new tool "godot_gridmap_edit" touches a sensitive surface (email/exec/net/fs); new tool "godot_resource" touches a sensitive surface (email/exec/net/fs); new tool "godot_scene3d" touches a sensitive surface (email/exec/net/fs); new tool "godot_docs" touches a sensitive surface (email/exec/net/fs); new tool "godot_input" appeared; new tool "godot_profiler" touches a sensitive surface (email/exec/net/fs); new tool "godot_runtime_state" touches a sensitive surface (email/exec/net/fs); new tool "godot_game_time" appeared; new tool "godot_exec" touches a sensitive surface (email/exec/net/fs); new tool "godot_validate_meshes" touches a sensitive surface (email/exec/net/fs).

• Transport config

  unscannable10% of grade

  Remote servers: TLS and auth mode (none/token/OAuth). Local servers: whether the manifest indicates it phones home.

  local stdio server: no remote transport or auth surface, and no phone-home/telemetry signal found in source. Absence of transport findings is NOT a safety guarantee — phone-home hosts can be constructed at runtime and defeat static analysis.