Spec Driven Development
MCP Server that facilitates spec-driven development workflows, not just Vibe Coding.
Descripción del creador (original en inglés)
Trust score for AI-generated code: scan repos, guard agent file writes, get a 0-100 score.
Estos tres nunca se combinan en una sola puntuación: las opiniones, las mediciones y la popularidad son cosas distintas.
Todavía no escribimos un resumen sencillo para este. Abajo están los datos que leímos del registro.
Elige la app de IA que usas y copia la configuración.
Necesitas
¿Qué app usas?
Elige tu app arriba. La recordamos, así que la próxima vez el botón dirá “Instalar en …”.
Abre Claude Desktop → Settings → Developer → Edit Config y pega esto en claude_desktop_config.json
{
"mcpServers": {
"umbra": {
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"-y",
"@elberacasa/umbra",
"mcp"
]
}
}
}Ejecuta esto en tu terminal
claude mcp add umbra -- npx -y @elberacasa/umbra mcpPégalo en .cursor/mcp.json de tu proyecto, o en ~/.cursor/mcp.json
{
"mcpServers": {
"umbra": {
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"-y",
"@elberacasa/umbra",
"mcp"
]
}
}
}Tu navegador te pide permiso para abrir la app; luego la app muestra la configuración y te pide confirmar. Los valores de las claves quedan vacíos para que los completes tú.
Pégalo en .vscode/mcp.json de tu proyecto
{
"servers": {
"umbra": {
"type": "stdio",
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"-y",
"@elberacasa/umbra",
"mcp"
]
}
}
}Tu navegador te pide permiso para abrir la app; luego la app muestra la configuración y te pide confirmar. Los valores de las claves quedan vacíos para que los completes tú.
Este se ejecuta en tu computadora, y ChatGPT solo puede conectarse a servidores en internet. Elige otra app.
Tu elección se guarda en una cookie en este dispositivo; no necesitas cuenta.
Esta configuración se genera a partir de la ficha del creador en el registro. Si el README dice otra cosa, sigue el README.
Se ejecuta en tu computadora; la lista de herramientas aparece en tu app de IA después de instalarlo.
Revisamos información que cualquiera puede ver; no hemos leído el código. Las revisiones que no aplican no se cuentan. · Revisado el 7 nov 2026
El nombre en el registro se verificó con la cuenta de GitHub elberacasa, dueña del repo
Todavía no hemos leído este repo en GitHub
Todavía no hemos leído este repo en GitHub
Este se ejecuta en tu computadora; no hay endpoint en internet
Se ejecuta en tu computadora y usa ajustes locales en su lugar
Se ejecuta en tu computadora; solo podemos leer listas de herramientas de endpoints en internet
Comparado con todos los servidores activos de esta categoría en el registro. Las estrellas solo cuentan cuando quien lo publica es dueño del repo.
Superó 1 de 1 revisiones básicas aplicables. No hemos leído el código. Antes de agregar una clave o un token, revisa qué acceso pide el servidor y usa una clave que tenga solo los permisos que necesitas.
El registro no indica ninguna clave obligatoria, aunque algunos servidores te piden iniciar sesión la primera vez que los usas.
Se ejecuta en tu computadora. Tu app de IA lo inicia cuando hace falta, y los datos no pasan por los servidores del creador (a menos que el propio servidor llame a un servicio en línea).
El repo de GitHub cambió por última vez –, y la última versión (1.2.0) llegó al registro hace 3 meses.
Las apps compatibles con MCP, como Claude Desktop, Claude Code, Cursor y VS Code. También necesitas Node.js en tu computadora.
En la misma categoría: Spec Driven Development, Remote Desktop Commander, SwarmMemo
Servidores de la misma categoría hechos por otros creadores, ordenados por estrellas.
Cómo leer una tarjeta:★ Estrellas de GitHubiTres pilares: reseñas · revisiones · usoiActualizado = fecha en que se publicó la última versión en el registroi
MCP Server that facilitates spec-driven development workflows, not just Vibe Coding.
Remote Desktop Commander: use files, terminal and processes on your own computers from any AI app.
Talk with agent swarms: rooms, private messages and paid tasks for AI agents
Copiado tal cual del repo del creador. PopNx MCP no lo ha revisado ni lo respalda. Se quitaron HTML, imágenes y scripts. Los enlaces llevan fuera de este sitio.
Everyone is vibecoding. Nobody is verifying. Umbra scores it.
Umbra is a deterministic Trust Score (0–100) for AI-generated code: the vibe coding security scanner that verifies what your agent shipped, not what it claimed. One command, fully local, evidence for every finding.
→ [umbra-badge.umbrabadge.workers.dev](https://umbra-badge.umbrabadge.workers.dev) — the landing, live badges and report pages
Quickstart · Demo · The Audit · How it works · The Four Axes · FAQ · Roadmap · Contributing · Website
Studies put exploitable vulnerabilities in 40 to 60 percent of AI-generated code, and coding agents routinely claim "all tests pass" when three do. The tooling for *writing* code with AI is a year ahead of the tooling for *trusting* it. Umbra closes that gap: SAST rebuilt for how software gets written now, plus sandboxed verification that catches what static rules cannot.
One command scans any repo an agent produced (Claude Code, Cursor, Copilot, Windsurf, Lovable) and returns a score with file:line evidence for every finding. With --deep it goes further: Umbra builds and boots the repo in a locked-down Docker sandbox, then replays the agent's own claims against reality. If the agent is lying about tests, the score is capped below passing, with receipts.
We ran Umbra over 61 public, actively-maintained AI-built repos and published everything. The Vibe-Coding Security Audit:
| Finding | Repos hit |
|---|---|
Hardcoded-secret findings (committed .env, service keys in source) | 25% |
| API routes with no auth check | 26% |
| Injection sinks (SQL interpolation, unsafe HTML injection) | 49% |
| Entire databases / SQL dumps committed to git | 13% |
| At least one critical finding | 10% |
| Zero scored findings (genuinely clean) | 7 of 61 |
Mean trust score: 74/100. One in five repos fails outright. The full report has per-class deep dives with representative snippets and fixes, the complete per-repo table, and an honest methodology section — including the false positives we found in our own rules while running it, and fixed (rubric v4).
npx umbra-scan # check — scans the directory you're standing in
npx umbra-scan --fix # heal — applies provably-safe fixes, shows the score climbing npx umbra-scan --setup # protect — pre-commit gate, PR checks, agent guardrails
That's the whole interface. Three verbs: check, heal, protect.
Using an AI coding agent? Umbra is built to be driven by agents, not just run by humans:
--setup installs PreToolUse hooks so every file the agent writes is guarded before it lands.umbra-mcp (npx --yes -p @elberacasa/umbra umbra-mcp) and the agent gets scan_repo, guard_content, and get_score as tools.Real output, scanning a typical vibe-coded Next.js app (fixtures/bad-app in this repo, Trust Score 30/100):
$ npx umbra-scan ./fixtures/bad-app
UMBRA TRUST SCORE: 30/100 🔴
SAFE 🔴 5/100 — 14 findings CLEAN ✅ 87/100 — 10 findings RUNS — not measured — run with --deep HONEST — not measured — run with --deep
Score computed over measured axes only (full rubric: SAFE 35%, RUNS 25%, HONEST 25%, CLEAN 15%). Rubric v4. …plus 7 further findings beyond the per-rule cap (see report)
Top findings: [safe/hardcoded-secrets] Hardcoded Supabase service_role JWT — bypasses all row level security — .env:2 [safe/hardcoded-secrets] Hardcoded Supabase service_role JWT — bypasses all row level security — lib/supabase.ts:5 [safe/supabase-antipatterns] Supabase service_role key reachable from client-side code — full database bypass for anyone who opens the bundle — .env:2 [safe/supabase-antipatterns] Supabase service_role key reachable from client-side code — full database bypass for anyone who opens the bundle — app/components/UserList.tsx:10 [safe/hardcoded-secrets] Committed environment file with secret values: .env — .env:1
Notes (low confidence — not scored): [safe/missing-rate-limit] Auth endpoint with no rate-limiting signal in the repo — brute-force / credential-stuffing exposure (heuristic) — app/api/login/route.ts:3
Badge:
The exit code is 1 when the score is below 50, so CI can gate on it.
All commands and flags (the expert layer — most users never need these)
umbra [path] # path defaults to the current directory
umbra [path] --json # machine-readable output umbra [path] --offline # skip npm registry checks, fully local umbra [path] --deep # verify RUNS and HONEST in a Docker sandbox umbra [path] --report # write UMBRA.md: an agent-actionable task list umbra [path] --fix # apply provably-safe fixes and re-scan (score before → after) umbra [path] --dry-run # preview --fix without writing anything umbra [path] --baseline-write # write .umbra-baseline.json: grandfather current findings, gate only on new ones umbra [path] --baseline # use an explicit baseline file ("write" is shorthand for --baseline-write) umbra [path] --publish # self-report the score to the hosted badge service (live README badge) umbra setup # install everything (hooks + Action + agent guards) umbra init # only the pre-commit hook + GitHub Action umbra protect # only the agent PreToolUse hooks (--remove uninstalls) umbra guard --stdin # hook entrypoint (agents call this, not humans) umbra mcp # run the MCP server (bin: umbra-mcp)
The canonical package is @elberacasa/umbra; umbra-scan is the short alias. Same engine either way.
repo in
│ ▼ Layer 0 · static rules (17 SAFE + CLEAN rules, 0 tokens, <1s) ▼ Layer 1 · evidence gating (confidence-scored, low never moves the score) ▼ Layer 2 · --deep sandbox (Docker: build, boot, HTTP probe, claim replay) │ ▼ deterministic Trust Score + verdict + badge
Every finding carries a confidence level and file:line evidence. Only high and medium confidence findings move the score; hunches go to a notes section. The rubric is versioned (currently v3), so the same repo always gets the same score. Full math in RUBRIC.md.
Scanning finds problems after they land. The immune layer checks every file your agent writes before it lands. umbra protect installs PreToolUse hooks into Claude Code and Kimi Code (auto-detected, one command); the same engine backs the umbra-mcp server for MCP-native agents.
flowchart LR
CC[Claude Code hook] --> E KC[Kimi Code hook] --> E MCP["umbra-mcp: guard_content"] --> E E{"guardContent(file, content) file rules + path guard"} -->|allow / warn| W[write lands] E -->|"block (exit 2)"| B["reason fed back: agent fixes the root cause"]
npx umbra-scan protect # install the hooks; --remove uninstalls cleanly
A leaked Stripe key or an alg: none JWT never reaches the file. The path guard hard-blocks agent writes into .git/hooks and .git/config (CVE-2026-26268, the agent-planted git hook escape), and live credentials going into .env. Blocking is reserved for high-confidence critical/high findings; everything else warns, and every failure fails open. Verdicts land in ~0.2 ms, so the guard never slows the agent down. Full story: docs/immune-layer.md.
--deep: verify AI code, don't trust itThe fast scan is static. --deep is LLM code verification with evidence. Umbra copies the repo into a throwaway Docker container (no network at runtime, 512 MB / 1 CPU hard limits, 120-second kill switch), builds it, boots it, HTTP-probes its endpoints, and replays every claim found in READMEs and agent artifacts against what actually happens. Slower (minutes, not seconds) and needs a running Docker daemon. Without Docker the sandboxed axes are skipped and left out of the score; unverifiable is never punished.
Real output, deep-scanning a repo whose README lies (fixtures/claims-app, capped at 49/100 by the liar cap):
$ npx @elberacasa/umbra ./fixtures/claims-app --deep
UMBRA TRUST SCORE: 49/100 🔴
SAFE ✅ 100/100 — 0 findings CLEAN ✅ 100/100 — 2 findings RUNS — not measured — No detectable run path (no Dockerfile, no package.json start script or main entry) HONEST ⚠️ 50/100 — 2 claims failed, 2 verified, 1 unverifiable
Score computed over measured axes only (full rubric: SAFE 35%, RUNS 25%, HONEST 25%, CLEAN 15%). Rubric v4. Score capped below passing: a documented claim was verified false. Trust is the product.
Claim receipts: CLAIM FAILED: "14 tests pass" — README.md:7 — actually 3 tests pass, 0 fail CLAIM FAILED: "build passes" — README.md:9 — actually build exits 1 CLAIM VERIFIED: "All tests pass" — CLAUDE.md:3 — 3 tests pass CLAIM VERIFIED: "All tests are passing" — README.md:8 — 3 tests pass
An
Solo se muestra el principio; lee el resto en el repo