io.github.alesdev88/archicad-mcp

MCPcommunity
v0.1.0io.github.alesdev88UnknownUpdated 6d agoGitHub

Delivery-readiness QA and full official + Tapir API access for a running Archicad 29.

Automatically indexed from public sources. Not yet verified by the developer on Forge.Claim this listing →
6d agoLast update
Package
Authorio.github.alesdev88
LicenseUnknown
Version0.1.0
Sourcemcp-registry
GitHubalesdev88/Archicad-MCP
SBOMCycloneDX 1.6 ↓
Trust Status
F
10/100Untrusted
✓Listed in Forge index+10/10
—Publisher identity verified+0/30
→ Publisher: run `forge publish` from the repo to claim ownership
—Domain verification+0/10
→ Not currently available for this listing type — the domain-verification check only runs for npm-backed packages today, so this row cannot be earned here yet regardless of what's hosted at the domain.
—Prompt-injection scan · not run+0/30
→ Not yet scanned — the repository archive is scanned on the next cron run
—Obfuscation / exfil scan · not run+0/20
→ Not yet scanned — the repository archive is scanned on the next cron run
Paste into Claude Code, Cursor, or any AI assistant to fix all gaps
StatusCommunity-indexed
PublisherUnverified
SignatureUnsigned
Domain—
Provenance—
DependenciesNot audited
Tool surface—
Security scanNot runHow well does this scan work?
EvalsNone
IndexedAug 26, 2026

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

Tools

Not scanned yet

Forge has no scan on record for this entry, so it holds no observation of its tool surface. That is an absence of evidence, not evidence that it exposes no tools.

About

Delivery-readiness QA and full official + Tapir API access for a running Archicad 29.

Keywords
mcp
Alternatives
Comparing tool surfaces…

No dependency coverage

This entry publishes no npm package, so Forge has no dependency tree for it. That is a gap in coverage — not a statement that it has no dependencies.