@jarroba/mcp

MCPcommunity
v0.1.5io.github.InvaratoMITUpdated 5d agonpmGitHub

MCP server (stdio, local) exposing 104 deterministic tools from Jarroba Tools, reusing the same code as the web app: read a CI log that does not fit in your context, audit tests, simulate make, run SQL against an ephemeral PostgreSQL, SPARQL, JTD diagrams

Works in
ClaudeCursorCopilotGemini

Inferred from the transports this listing declares (stdio). A client not listed here hasn’t been ruled out — it just isn’t something Forge can confirm.

Automatically indexed from public sources. Not yet verified by the developer on Forge.Claim this listing →
672Downloads/wk
5d agoLast update
Package
Authorio.github.Invarato
LicenseMIT
Version0.1.5
Sourcenpm+mcp-registry
npm@jarroba/mcp
GitHubInvarato/JarrobaTools
SBOMCycloneDX 1.6 ↓
Trust Status
B
60/100Good
✓Listed in Forge index+10/10
—Publisher identity verified+0/20
→ Publisher: run `forge publish` from the package repo to claim ownership
—Ed25519 publish signature+0/5
→ Included automatically when the publisher runs `forge publish`
—Domain verification+0/5
→ Publisher: host /.well-known/forge.json on the package homepage with { "publisher": "<github-login>" }
—npm Trusted Publishing (Sigstore)+0/5
→ Publish from GitHub Actions with --provenance so the attestation binds this package to this repo
—npm maintainer match+0/5
→ Earned once your identity is verified above and that login is an npm maintainer of this package
✓CVE scan · clean+30/30
✓Static analysis · clean+20/20
Paste into Claude Code, Cursor, or any AI assistant to fix all gaps
StatusCommunity-indexed
PublisherUnverified
SignatureUnsigned
Domain—
Provenance—
Dependencies✓ 60 resolved+ · none vulnerable
Tool surface—
Security scan✓ Cleanv0.1.5 · 4d agoHow well does this scan work?
EvalsNone
IndexedSep 14, 2026

Verification confirms publisher identity (repo ownership), not code safety. The security scan covers known CVEs and suspicious install scripts.

Tools

No tool declarations found in the source4d ago

Forge read 0 source files from the published package tarball and matched no MCP tool registrations. Extraction is pattern-based over shipped source: a server that builds its tool list at runtime, or that ships only bundled or minified code, registers nothing this can see. Treat it as “not detected”, not as “exposes none”.

About

MCP server (stdio, local) exposing 104 deterministic tools from Jarroba Tools, reusing the same code as the web app: read a CI log that does not fit in your context, audit tests, simulate make, run SQL against an ephemeral PostgreSQL, SPARQL, JTD diagrams

Keywords
mcpmodelcontextprotocolclaudecursordeveloper-toolslogstestingsqlsparqldiagramstokenizercidr
Alternatives
Comparing tool surfaces…

Dependency tree

What one Forge scan resolved from npm metadata on 2026-09-19 — observed resolution, not a publisher declaration.

60 packages resolved · 7 direct · none carrying advisories Resolution stops at depth 4 and 60 packages.

The crawl stopped at the 60-package limit. The rest of the tree was never resolved.

36 more resolved packages are not drawn here (display cap: 24). Every dependency carrying an advisory is drawn regardless of the cap. Full inventory (CycloneDX SBOM)

Declared but not resolved

65 declared dependencies never landed in the tree. They are missing from Forge's resolution, not from the package.

+53 more not listed. The counts by reason above cover all of them.

Not followed: peerDependencies. This tree covers runtime dependencies only, so anything those pull in was never resolved.

Topics

Related in databases