Expandfi MCP Server

@expandfi/mcp-server npm v1.6.1

Published by @expandfi — no publish provenance and no public repository, so the publisher could not be verified and the source cannot be independently located.

ExpandFi MCP server for Claude Desktop and Claude Code

Trust grade
A
92/100
Last scanned get badge →
Trust
A · 92/100
Adoption risk for you: the threat score, then adjusted down for blast radius, publisher verification and how much the scan could see. Deterministic; every point is auditable.
Capability
High
Blast radius if it went rogue — what the server’s tools could reach. Independent of trust.
Coverage
Source
How much the scan could actually inspect. Shallow coverage is stated, never hidden.
Share this Trust Score
𝕏 Share LinkedIn Reddit
A Why this grade threat 100 − adoption risk = 92/100

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 − 8 = 92. 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:

PointsAdoption-risk factor
−6 capability blast radius (high) — client exposure if the model is manipulated
−2 publisher verification (unlinked) — no provenance/repo link, but the shipped source was fully read

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 1

high Shell/command execution in server code (expandfi_mcp_base.js)MTC-SRC-002

In the server's implementation (`expandfi_mcp_base.js:525`): Spawning a shell/process is command-execution capability; with unsanitized tool input it is command injection / RCE. This is read from the code itself — not from the tool description — so a poisoned server cannot hide it behind honest-looking metadata.

Evidence: } = await import("node:child_process"); const { file, args } = browserOpenCommand(process.platform, url); // No `sh

Fix: Review this call path: confirm it never receives unsanitized tool input, constrain it, or remove it. Treat a server whose code reaches these sinks as high-capability regardless of what its tools claim.

Location: server expandfi_mcp_base.js

Tools 32

Each tool and what it can reach — statically extracted from the published source.

  • download_data_dash_artifactingests untrusted input
  • download_reportingests untrusted input
  • get_skillsingests untrusted input
  • get_support_requestingests untrusted input
  • list_support_request_attachmentsingests untrusted input
  • cancel_data_dashno sensitive capability
  • cogs_coverage_gapsno sensitive capability
  • create_data_dashno sensitive capability
  • dataset_contextno sensitive capability
  • get_auth_statusno sensitive capability
Show 22 more tools ↓
  • get_docsno sensitive capability
  • get_docs_versionno sensitive capability
  • get_skills_versionno sensitive capability
  • list_cogsno sensitive capability
  • list_data_dashesno sensitive capability
  • list_datasetsno sensitive capability
  • list_merchantsno sensitive capability
  • list_reportsno sensitive capability
  • list_support_requestsno sensitive capability
  • list_tablesno sensitive capability
  • merchant_health_summaryno sensitive capability
  • preview_cogs_planno sensitive capability
  • readonly_db_connectionno sensitive capability
  • report_contextno sensitive capability
  • report_datano sensitive capability
  • report_routing_guidanceno sensitive capability
  • report_summaryno sensitive capability
  • show_data_dashno sensitive capability
  • show_merchantno sensitive capability
  • submit_feedbackno sensitive capability
  • table_contextno sensitive capability
  • update_support_requestno sensitive capability

What this scan could not see

Versions 3

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.

VersionScoreFindingsEngineScanned
v1.6.1 latest A 92/100 1 1.13.0 2026-09-07
v1.5.0 B 82/100 2 1.13.0 2026-08-25
v1.4.0 B 82/100 2 1.12.1 2026-08-22

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.

MCP Trust Score: A · 92/100
Markdown (GitHub README)
[![MCP Trust Score](https://mcptrustchecker.com/registry/expandfi-mcp-server/badge.svg)](https://mcptrustchecker.com/registry/expandfi-mcp-server)
HTML
<a href="https://mcptrustchecker.com/registry/expandfi-mcp-server"><img src="https://mcptrustchecker.com/registry/expandfi-mcp-server/badge.svg" alt="MCP Trust Score" height="20"></a>
Prefer shields.io styling? Point it at https://mcptrustchecker.com/registry/expandfi-mcp-server/badge.json via https://img.shields.io/endpoint?url=…

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 @expandfi/mcp-server --online

Use the free API → How scoring works

More in Content Management