Adelaidasofia Linear MCP Server
adelaidasofia-linear-mcp
PyPI
v0.3.2
Published by adelaidasofia — no publish provenance, so origin is unverified, but the source is public: the repository link below is self-declared yet readable, so you can inspect the code before adopting it.
The grade answers one question — how safe is this server for you to adopt — so it is computed in two auditable stages. Nothing below is an opinion or an LLM's guess; every line is a real term the deterministic engine applied, and the same input always yields the same number.
1. Threat score — 100 − 0 = 100. What the published surface and source actually contain:
The deterministic scan raised no scored threat in the surface it inspected — the threat score stayed at 100. Capability observations and advisory notes are recorded but never lower it.
2. Client adoption risk — 100 − 4 = 96. Three small, subtract-only factors that reflect your risk in adopting it — a clean scan proves less on a powerful, unverified or barely-inspectable package, so the grade says so plainly:
| Points | Adoption-risk factor |
|---|---|
| −3 | capability blast radius (moderate) — client exposure if the model is manipulated |
| −1 | publisher verification (public source) — no provenance, but the source is public and inspectable |
Capability observations and info notes are shown under Findings but never scored.
Open any row's finding below for the file, line and evidence behind a deduction.
Findings 0
Tools 57
Each tool and what it can reach — statically extracted from the published source.
create_issue_labelnetwork egresscreate_issue_relationnetwork egresscreate_webhooknetwork egressdelete_webhooknetwork egressupdate_webhooknetwork egressarchive_notificationno sensitive capabilityattachments_for_urlno sensitive capabilitybulk_save_issuesno sensitive capabilitycreate_agent_session_on_commentno sensitive capabilitycreate_agent_session_on_issueno sensitive capability
Show 47 more tools ↓
delete_attachmentno sensitive capabilitydelete_issue_relationno sensitive capabilityget_agent_sessionno sensitive capabilityget_attachmentno sensitive capabilityget_documentno sensitive capabilityget_initiativeno sensitive capabilityget_issueno sensitive capabilityget_issue_statusno sensitive capabilityget_milestoneno sensitive capabilityget_notificationno sensitive capabilityget_projectno sensitive capabilityget_teamno sensitive capabilityget_userno sensitive capabilityget_webhookno sensitive capabilityhealthcheckno sensitive capabilitylink_url_to_issueno sensitive capabilitylist_agent_sessionsno sensitive capabilitylist_attachmentsno sensitive capabilitylist_commentsno sensitive capabilitylist_cyclesno sensitive capabilitylist_documentsno sensitive capabilitylist_initiativesno sensitive capabilitylist_issue_labelsno sensitive capabilitylist_issue_relationsno sensitive capabilitylist_issue_statusesno sensitive capabilitylist_issuesno sensitive capabilitylist_milestonesno sensitive capabilitylist_notificationsno sensitive capabilitylist_projectsno sensitive capabilitylist_teamsno sensitive capabilitylist_usersno sensitive capabilitylist_webhooksno sensitive capabilitylist_workspacesno sensitive capabilitymark_all_notifications_readno sensitive capabilitymark_notification_readno sensitive capabilitynotifications_unread_countno sensitive capabilitysave_commentno sensitive capabilitysave_documentno sensitive capabilitysave_initiativeno sensitive capabilitysave_issueno sensitive capabilitysave_milestoneno sensitive capabilitysave_projectno sensitive capabilitysave_status_updateno sensitive capabilitysearch_documentsno sensitive capabilitysearch_issuesno sensitive capabilitysearch_projectsno sensitive capabilitysemantic_searchno sensitive capability
What this scan could not see
- Tools were statically extracted from the published source (57 recovered), not enumerated from a running server. Tool-poisoning, Unicode-smuggling, capability and toxic-flow analysis ran on this inferred surface, but a mis-parsed registration could be missed or mis-attributed, so tool-derived findings are capped below “confirmed”. To grade the real runtime surface, scan the running server: --command "npx -y <package>".
Versions 1
Scan history per published version. The engine is deterministic — the same version always yields the same score, so a changed score means the package itself changed.
| Version | Score | Findings | Engine | Scanned |
|---|---|---|---|---|
v0.3.2 latest |
A 96/100 | 0 | 1.9.0 | 2026-07-23 |
Embed this score
Show this server's live Trust Score in your README, docs or website. The badge is served straight from the registry and updates automatically after every rescan — no API key needed. It links back to this page, so anyone who sees the grade can also read the findings behind it instead of taking a number on faith.
Verify this score yourself
The score above is reproducible: the same package version always yields the same result. Run it locally or over the free API — no account, no LLM, fully deterministic.
npx mcptrustchecker scan adelaidasofia-linear-mcp --online --registry pypiMore in Developer Tools
Security scan results for the 1stay MCP server.
Security scan results for the Adguard Home MCP server.
Security scan results for the Ado Browser MCP server.
Security scan results for the Adobe Experience Dev MCP server.
Security scan results for the Aemet MCP server.
Security scan results for the Affinity Mcp Bridge MCP server.