Personal Kg MCP Server

@tomschell/personal-kg-mcp npm v1.0.2

Published by @tomschell — 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.

Personal Knowledge Graph MCP server for maintaining a local, private knowledge graph of decisions, progress, insights, and questions during development

Trust grade
B
83/100
Last scanned get badge →
Trust
B · 83/100
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
Critical
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
B Why this grade threat 94 − adoption risk = 83/100

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 − 6.3 = 94. What the published surface and source actually contain:

PointsWhat was foundCategory
−6.3 Untrusted input concatenated into a command sink MTC-SRC-009 injection

2. Client adoption risk — 94 − 11 = 83. 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
−10 capability blast radius (critical) — 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 3

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

In the server's implementation (`dist/tools/core.js:46`): 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 branch = execSync("git rev-parse --abbrev-ref HEAD", {

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 dist/tools/core.js

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

In the server's implementation (`dist/utils/github.js:8`): 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: port { execSync } from 'child_process'; // Check if gh CLI is available and authenticated export function isGitHubCLIAva

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 dist/utils/github.js

medium Untrusted input concatenated into a command sink (dist/utils/github.js)MTC-SRC-009

In the server's implementation (`dist/utils/github.js:46`): A shell/process command assembled from concatenated or interpolated values is command injection when any part is attacker-influenced — the OWASP canonical RCE flow. Verify what reaches the interpolated value. This is read from the code itself — not from the tool description — so a poisoned server cannot hide it behind honest-looking metadata.

Evidence: const output = execSync(`gh issue view ${issueNumber} --json number,title,body,state,labels`, { encoding: 'utf8

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 dist/utils/github.js

Tools 23

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

  • kg_get_nodeingests untrusted input
  • kg_backupno sensitive capability
  • kg_capture_sessionno sensitive capability
  • kg_create_edgeno sensitive capability
  • kg_delete_nodeno sensitive capability
  • kg_detect_topic_clustersno sensitive capability
  • kg_exportno sensitive capability
  • kg_find_connection_pathno sensitive capability
  • kg_find_emerging_conceptsno sensitive capability
  • kg_find_similarno sensitive capability
Show 13 more tools ↓
  • kg_get_project_stateno sensitive capability
  • kg_graph_exportno sensitive capability
  • kg_importno sensitive capability
  • kg_link_sessionno sensitive capability
  • kg_list_edgesno sensitive capability
  • kg_query_contextno sensitive capability
  • kg_query_time_rangeno sensitive capability
  • kg_relationships_maintenanceno sensitive capability
  • kg_repairno sensitive capability
  • kg_searchno sensitive capability
  • kg_semantic_searchno sensitive capability
  • kg_session_warmupno sensitive capability
  • kg_validateno sensitive capability

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
v1.0.2 latest B 83/100 3 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: B · 83/100
Markdown (GitHub README)
[![MCP Trust Score](https://mcptrustchecker.com/registry/tomschell-personal-kg-mcp/badge.svg)](https://mcptrustchecker.com/registry/tomschell-personal-kg-mcp)
HTML
<a href="https://mcptrustchecker.com/registry/tomschell-personal-kg-mcp"><img src="https://mcptrustchecker.com/registry/tomschell-personal-kg-mcp/badge.svg" alt="MCP Trust Score" height="20"></a>
Prefer shields.io styling? Point it at https://mcptrustchecker.com/registry/tomschell-personal-kg-mcp/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 @tomschell/personal-kg-mcp --online

Use the free API → How scoring works

More in AI, Memory & Reasoning