프로토타입 · 미리 보기: 공식 레지스트리의 모든 서버를 담고 있으며 30분마다 동기화해요. 리뷰와 계정 기능은 다음 단계에서 열려요.
PopNx MCPAI를 쓰는 사람을 위한 MCP 서버 · 쉬운 말로 설명해요

Sweep MCP

제작자: les-k버전 0.1.1i★ –i내 컴퓨터에서 실행
레지스트리 이름io.github.les-k/sweep-mcp

설치

개요

제작자가 쓴 설명(영어 원문)

An MCP server that can delete directories, and the guard rails that make that acceptable.

PopNx MCP의 세 기둥

이 세 가지는 절대 하나의 점수로 합치지 않아요. 의견, 측정, 인기는 서로 다른 것이니까요.

할 수 있는 일

이 서버는 아직 쉬운 말로 된 요약을 쓰지 못했어요. 아래는 레지스트리에서 읽어 온 사실이에요.

  • 연결 방식: 내 컴퓨터에서 실행
  • 전송 방식: stdio
  • 카테고리: 기타

설치

쓰고 있는 AI 앱을 고른 다음 설정을 복사하세요.

설치하기 전에

  • 기본 점검: 1개 중 1개 통과
  • 내 컴퓨터에서 내 사용자 계정의 권한(파일, 네트워크, 앱)으로 실행돼요.
  • 레지스트리에 입력해야 할 키가 나와 있지 않아요.

필요한 것

  • PyPIPython의 uv 설치(uvx 명령어용)

어떤 앱을 쓰세요?

위에서 앱을 고르세요. 기억해 두었다가 다음부터는 버튼에 “…에 설치”라고 표시해요.

Claude Desktop → Settings → Developer → Edit Config를 열고 claude_desktop_config.json에 이 내용을 붙여 넣으세요

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "sweep": {
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": [
        "sweep-mcp",
        "--root",
        "your-value"
      ]
    }
  }
}

터미널에서 이 명령어를 실행하세요

claude mcp add sweep -- uvx sweep-mcp --root your-value

이 서버는 실행 명령어에 값을 넣어야 해서, 설정을 복사한 뒤 직접 채워 주세요.

또는 설정을 직접 복사하기

프로젝트의 .cursor/mcp.json 또는 ~/.cursor/mcp.json에 붙여 넣으세요

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "sweep": {
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": [
        "sweep-mcp",
        "--root",
        "your-value"
      ]
    }
  }
}

브라우저가 앱을 열지 물어본 다음, 앱이 설정을 보여 주고 확인을 요청해요. 키 값은 비워 두니 직접 입력하세요.

이 서버는 실행 명령어에 값을 넣어야 해서, 설정을 복사한 뒤 직접 채워 주세요.

또는 설정을 직접 복사하기

프로젝트의 .vscode/mcp.json에 붙여 넣으세요

{
  "servers": {
    "sweep": {
      "type": "stdio",
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": [
        "sweep-mcp",
        "--root",
        "your-value"
      ]
    }
  }
}

브라우저가 앱을 열지 물어본 다음, 앱이 설정을 보여 주고 확인을 요청해요. 키 값은 비워 두니 직접 입력하세요.

이 서버는 내 컴퓨터에서 실행되는데, ChatGPT는 인터넷에 있는 서버에만 연결할 수 있어요. 다른 앱을 고르세요.

선택한 앱은 이 기기의 쿠키에만 저장돼요. 계정은 필요 없어요.

이 설정은 제작자의 레지스트리 정보로 만들었어요. README와 다르면 README를 따르세요.

할 수 있는 일

내 컴퓨터에서 실행돼요. 설치하면 AI 앱에 도구 목록이 나타나요.

기본 점검i

누구나 볼 수 있는 정보를 점검했고, 코드는 읽지 않았어요. 해당하지 않는 항목은 개수에서 뺐어요. · 2026년 11월 7일 점검

  • ✓ 통과

    제작자와 저장소 일치

    레지스트리 이름이 GitHub 계정 les-k 기준으로 확인되었고, 이 계정이 저장소를 소유하고 있어요

  • … 아직 점검 안 함

    계속 관리되고 있음

    아직 GitHub에서 이 저장소를 읽어 오지 않았어요

  • … 아직 점검 안 함

    라이선스 있음

    아직 GitHub에서 이 저장소를 읽어 오지 않았어요

  • – 해당 없음

    엔드포인트 응답

    내 컴퓨터에서 실행되는 서버라 인터넷 엔드포인트가 없어요

  • – 해당 없음

    OAuth로 로그인

    내 컴퓨터에서 실행되며, 대신 로컬 설정을 사용해요

  • … 아직 점검 안 함

    도구 설명에 숨겨진 지시 없음

    내 컴퓨터에서 실행돼요. 도구 목록은 인터넷 엔드포인트가 있는 서버에서만 읽을 수 있어요

기타 카테고리의 다른 서버와 비교i

  • 이 카테고리의 다른 서버 32709개 중 0%보다 스타가 많아요
  • 이 카테고리의 다른 서버 32709개 중 53%보다 최근에 레지스트리에 공개됐어요
  • 기본 점검 결과가 이 카테고리의 다른 서버 32709개 중 100%와 같거나 더 좋아요

레지스트리에서 이 카테고리의 활성 서버 전체와 비교했어요. 스타는 게시자가 저장소를 소유한 경우에만 세요.

자주 묻는 질문

Sweep MCP, 안전한가요?

해당하는 기본 점검 1개 중 1개를 통과했어요. 코드는 읽지 않았어요. 키나 토큰을 넣기 전에 서버가 어떤 권한을 요구하는지 확인하고, 꼭 필요한 권한만 있는 키를 쓰세요.

어떤 키나 코드가 필요한가요?

레지스트리에 필수 키가 나와 있지 않아요. 다만 처음 쓸 때 로그인을 요구하는 서버도 있어요.

내 컴퓨터에서 실행되나요, 클라우드에서 실행되나요?

내 컴퓨터에서 실행돼요. AI 앱이 필요할 때 실행하고, 데이터는 제작자의 서버를 거치지 않아요(서버 자체가 온라인 서비스를 호출하는 경우는 제외).

아직 관리되고 있나요?

GitHub 저장소는 마지막으로 – 변경됐고, 최신 버전(0.1.1)은 36일 전 레지스트리에 올라왔어요.

어떤 앱에서 쓸 수 있나요?

Claude Desktop, Claude Code, Cursor, VS Code처럼 MCP를 지원하는 앱에서 쓸 수 있어요. 내 컴퓨터에 Python (uv)도 있어야 해요.

대신 쓸 수 있는 건 뭐가 있나요?

같은 카테고리에는: Spec Driven Development, Remote Desktop Commander, SwarmMemo

대안

같은 카테고리에서 다른 제작자가 만든 서버예요. 스타 순으로 정렬했어요.

카드 보는 법:★ GitHub 스타i세 기둥: 리뷰 · 점검 · 사용 정도i업데이트 = 최신 버전을 레지스트리에 공개한 날i

Spec Driven Development

제작자: formulahendry

MCP Server that facilitates spec-driven development workflows, not just Vibe Coding.

내 컴퓨터에서 실행★ 440MIT14개월 전 업데이트
설치

Remote Desktop Commander

제작자: desktop-commander

Remote Desktop Commander: use files, terminal and processes on your own computers from any AI app.

클라우드에서 실행★ 211그저께 업데이트
설치

SwarmMemo

제작자: Hugo0

Talk with agent swarms: rooms, private messages and paid tasks for AI agents

클라우드에서 실행오늘 업데이트
설치

제작자의 README

README 열기

제작자의 저장소에서 쓰인 그대로 가져왔어요. PopNx MCP가 검토하거나 보증한 내용이 아니에요. HTML, 이미지, 스크립트는 제거했어요. 링크를 누르면 이 사이트를 벗어나요.

sweep-mcp

In plain terms: this lets an AI clear out the junk folders that pile up

on a developer's machine, and makes it incapable of touching anything else. It

works only inside folders you name, only deletes things it found itself, and

checks again in the instant before deleting — so nothing can be swapped in at

the last second.

An MCP server that deletes directories — and the guard rails that make handing that capability to a language model something other than reckless.

It exposes sweep over the Model Context Protocol, so an agent can find and reclaim node_modules, .venv, target, __pycache__ and friends. The interesting part is not the deleting. It is everything that has to be true before a delete is allowed to happen.

Research published in 2026 found security issues in 66% of 1,808 scanned MCP servers, with 30+ CVEs filed against MCP implementations in a single quarter. This repository is one server written the other way round: the refusals first, the feature second.


The threat model

An MCP server that can delete directories is a loaded gun pointed at whatever the process can reach. Five things could go wrong, and each has a control and a test that makes it fire.

RiskControlTest
Agent scans / or C:\ and deletes the machineRoot allowlist, fixed at server start. The agent cannot set, extend or read past it. No roots configured → every request refusedtest_empty_allowlist_denies_every_path
../../ or a symlink used to escape the allowlistEvery path is resolve()d before the containment check, so it is judged on where it really pointstest_dotdot_traversal_is_denied, test_symlink_pointing_outside_root_is_denied
Agent asks to delete a path it never scanned`reclaim` accepts ids, not paths. There is no path-shaped route to deletion anywhere in the APItest_there_is_no_way_to_delete_by_path
The directory changes between scan and deleteEvery find is re-checked against the live filesystem at deletion time — still contained, still a directory, still not a link, marker file still presenttest_revalidate_refuses_a_directory_swapped_for_a_symlink
Accidental destructionDry run is the default. Deletion requires confirm="delete" exactly; anything else is treated as notest_a_wrong_confirmation_string_stays_a_dry_run

Two smaller ones, for the same reason:

  • Ticket ids are random, not sequential. f-3a91c02b77de, not 1. A counting id invites an agent to iterate until something deletes.
  • Tool descriptions are string literals. They are never assembled from anything read off disk, so a directory named ignore-previous-instructions reaches the model as data rather than as a sentence (test_tool_descriptions_are_static).

What it does *not* protect against

The controls above are worth exactly what they cover, and no more.

  • A misconfigured root. Start it with --root / and it will happily work through your filesystem. The allowlist is only as good as what you put in it, and nothing here second-guesses that choice.
  • A malicious client. The guard constrains *what* may be deleted, never *who* is asking. A client that scans legitimately and then confirms legitimately gets exactly what it asked for.
  • An agent that has been talked into it. Static tool descriptions keep filesystem content out of the model's instructions, but nothing here can stop an agent that decides, for its own bad reasons, to delete a real node_modules it genuinely found.
  • The last few milliseconds. revalidate() narrows the window between check and delete; it does not close it. Closing it properly needs directory file descriptors held across the operation, which shutil.rmtree does not offer portably. This is a real race, and it is smaller, not absent.
  • Windows junctions on Python 3.11. os.path.isjunction arrived in 3.12. Below that, junction detection degrades to symlinks only — the same compromise sweep itself makes, stated here rather than buried.
  • Privilege. This is not a sandbox. It runs as whoever started it.

Scanner results

Run against agent-audit 0.19.2 on 18 August 2026.

Static scan — 0 findings, risk score 0.0 (LOW), 7 files.

One low finding appeared on the first pass: AGENT-110, source-map artifacts not excluded from distribution. This package ships no JavaScript, so there were no source maps to leak, but the exclusion is now declared in pyproject.toml anyway — it costs nothing, and arguing with a supply-chain checklist is a poor use of anyone's afternoon.

Tool inspection — 0 tool findings. No tool-poisoning, cross-origin or rug-pull patterns detected in any of the three definitions.

The risk ratings it assigned are worth reproducing, because they are wrong in an instructive way:

ToolRatedInferred permissions
list_targetsMEDIUMSHELL_EXEC, FILE_READ
scanHIGHFILE_DELETE, SHELL_EXEC, FILE_READ
reclaimHIGHFILE_DELETE, SHELL_EXEC, FILE_READ

scan cannot delete anything. It is read-only, declared read_only_hint=True, and there is a test asserting it stays that way. It was rated HIGH with a FILE_DELETE permission because the scanner matches keywords against the description, and this server's scan description contains the sentence:

"Read-only: this never deletes anything."

The word *deletes* is on the FILE_DELETE keyword list. SHELL_EXEC comes from the word *command*, in "the command that regenerates it" — this server never executes a shell command at all.

The description could be reworded to score better. It has not been, because the description's audience is a language model deciding whether to call the tool, and "this never deletes anything" is the single most useful sentence in it. A keyword scanner is a smoke detector, not a judge — a clean run is worth having and worth publishing, and a rating derived from string matching on prose is not evidence about behaviour in either direction.

Two scanners were tried and one could not be run: Invariant Labs' mcp-scan has been renamed snyk-agent-scan following the Snyk acquisition and now requires a SNYK_TOKEN. Cisco's mcp-scanner is not published to PyPI. agent-audit's own stdio transport also times out against this server on Windows while a hand-driven handshake to the identical binary returns in milliseconds, so its analyser was fed the real tools/list output directly — the transport was bypassed, the analysis was not.

Install

pip install sweep-mcp

From a source checkout: pip install -e .

Configure

The server takes one or more --root directories. It has no default. Starting it without a root is an error rather than an invitation to scan everything:

{

"mcpServers": { "sweep": { "command": "sweep-mcp", "args": ["--root", "/home/you/code", "--root", "/home/you/work"] } } }

The tools

ToolDestructiveWhat it does
list_targetsnoThe kinds of directory it knows how to reclaim, and the command that regenerates each
scannoFinds reclaimable directories under a path inside the roots. Returns ids, sizes, and the regenerate command
reclaimyesDeletes finds by id. Dry run unless confirm="delete"

All three carry MCP ToolAnnotations, so a client that gates destructive tools behind a confirmation prompt has what it needs: reclaim declares destructive_hint=True, the other two declare read_only_hint=True. That is asserted in the suite too — a hint that silently regressed would be worse than none.

A session

scan(path="/home/you/code")

→ 12 finds, 3.4 GB f-3a91c02b77de /home/you/code/api/node_modules 1.9 GB npm install f-8e0244fd1b6c /home/you/code/ml/.venv 842 MB python -m venv .venv

reclaim(ids=["f-3a91c02b77de"]) → dry_run: true would_delete: 1 path, 1.9 GB note: Nothing was deleted. Call again with confirm='delete'.

reclaim(ids=["f-3a91c02b77de"], confirm="delete") → deleted: 1 path, reclaimed 1.9 GB

Tests

38 tests. 34 run on Windows; all 38 run on Linux.

The four that skip locally need to create symlinks, which Windows refuses without developer mode — and one of them covers the swap-between-scan-and-delete attack, which is the single most important test here. Skipping it quietly would make the suite a decoration, so CI runs on Linux and fails the build if those tests report as skipped there.

pytest -q --cov=sweep_mcp

Coverage sits at 83%. The gap is mostly main() and the argparse wiring, which the suite drives through build_server instead — the transport is the part least worth mocking and least likely to be where the damage comes from.

Nothing in the suite mocks the filesystem. A mocked Path would pass every test in here while the server still deleted the wrong directory.

Layout

src/sweep_mcp/

guard.py 212 lines - the allowlist, the tickets, the re-check. Imports no MCP. server.py 280 lines - three tools. Translation only. tests/ test_guard.py 23 tests - one per rule, each named for the attack it stands in for test_server.py 15 tests - driven through call_tool, the way a client would

guard.py deliberately knows nothing about MCP. Every decision that could lose someone their data is testable without a client, a transport or an agent in the loop. If a rule looks like it is enforced in server.py, that is a bug — it belongs one layer down, where the tests can reach it.

Licence

MIT.

Author

Built by Leslie Kadenge. I do independent security reviews of MCP servers; my public survey of thirteen production servers is at les-k.github.io/field-notes.html.

PopNx에게 묻기