Floomhq MCP Server

@floomhq/mcp-server npm v0.1.8 Source verified

Published by floomhq — publish provenance cryptographically ties this package to that repository. That is proof of origin, not an official vendor package.

MCP server for Floom, lets AI agents deploy and run apps

Trust grade
A
94/100
Last scanned get badge →
Trust
A · 94/100
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 = 94/100

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 − 6 = 94. 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

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

critical Completed toxic-flow trifecta across toolsMTC-FLOW-002

This server (without client built-ins) exposes a complete data-exfiltration chain: fetch_context → get_logs → deploy. Untrusted input is ingested, private data is read, and it can be sent to an external sink via the agent composing the tools (→). Static analysis proves the primitive exists, not that a specific run will occur.

Fix: Remove one leg of the trifecta: isolate untrusted-input tools from secret-reading tools and from egress tools, or require human approval between them.

Location: flow fetch_context → get_logs → deploy

Tools 32

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

  • deploynetwork egress
  • fetch_contextingests untrusted input
  • get_logsreads sensitive data
  • refresh_contextingests untrusted input
  • create_from_templateno sensitive capability
  • create_scheduleno sensitive capability
  • create_share_linkno sensitive capability
  • delete_contextno sensitive capability
  • delete_projectno sensitive capability
  • delete_scheduleno sensitive capability
Show 22 more tools ↓
  • deploy_from_githubno sensitive capability
  • disable_share_linkno sensitive capability
  • disable_webhooksno sensitive capability
  • enable_webhooksno sensitive capability
  • get_contextno sensitive capability
  • get_projectno sensitive capability
  • get_templateno sensitive capability
  • list_contextsno sensitive capability
  • list_projectsno sensitive capability
  • list_schedulesno sensitive capability
  • list_share_linksno sensitive capability
  • list_templatesno sensitive capability
  • list_versionsno sensitive capability
  • manage_secretsno sensitive capability
  • promoteno sensitive capability
  • rollbackno sensitive capability
  • runno sensitive capability
  • storage_deleteno sensitive capability
  • storage_getno sensitive capability
  • storage_listno sensitive capability
  • storage_setno sensitive capability
  • update_projectno sensitive capability

Toxic flows 1

Cross-tool combinations that form a data-exfiltration primitive (untrusted input → sensitive source → external sink).

What this scan could not see

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.

VersionScoreFindingsEngineScanned
v0.1.8 latest A 94/100 1 1.13.0 2026-09-07

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 · 94/100
Markdown (GitHub README)
[![MCP Trust Score](https://mcptrustchecker.com/registry/floomhq-mcp-server/badge.svg)](https://mcptrustchecker.com/registry/floomhq-mcp-server)
HTML
<a href="https://mcptrustchecker.com/registry/floomhq-mcp-server"><img src="https://mcptrustchecker.com/registry/floomhq-mcp-server/badge.svg" alt="MCP Trust Score" height="20"></a>
Prefer shields.io styling? Point it at https://mcptrustchecker.com/registry/floomhq-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 @floomhq/mcp-server --online

Use the free API → How scoring works

Other implementations of Floomhq 1

Independent packages implementing the same tool, scanned with the same engine. Compare all 2 side by side →

More in Other