Public leaderboard

Public assessment

OksigeniaSL/checker-mcp (@oksigenia/checker-mcp)

oksigenia-checker-mcp · v0.1.0 · scanned

What changed in the harness

Selection accuracy 100→100, token cost up 5%, unconfirmed writes 0%→0%.

Category breakdown

Where the score comes from.

Earned points across the four signals Gradable measures. Safety and Legibility are scored out of 30; Economics and Discoverability are scored out of 20.

01Safety

0.0 / 30

0.0 out of 30
02Legibility

29.0 / 30

29.0 out of 30
03Economics

20.0 / 20

20.0 out of 20
04Discoverability

15.5 / 20

15.5 out of 20

Highest-impact fix

Estimated gain +30 points

Add explicit identity and permission preflight tools

Expose machine-readable principal/tenant confirmation and a non-mutating permission check so agents can verify both before destructive actions.

Description evidence

Defects and rewrites.

2 defects found across the exposed tool descriptions. Suggested rewrites make purpose, inputs, boundaries, and returns easier for an agent to understand.

Tool Defect types Suggested rewrite
list_checks
no_return_description
Return a categorized list of every check the Oksigenia Checker performs. Each entry includes the check id and the reason the check matters, so you can discover which check ids exist before calling explain_check. The reasons are returned in the language set by the 'lang' parameter ('es' or 'en', defaulting to $OKSIGENIA_LANG or 'en').
explain_check
no_return_description
Given a check id (see list_checks), return an explanation for that single check covering what it verifies, why it matters, and how to remediate a failure. The explanation is returned in the language set by the 'lang' parameter ('es' or 'en', defaulting to $OKSIGENIA_LANG or 'en').

Selection evidence

Confusable tool pairs.

3 pairs where similar names or overlapping descriptions may send an agent toward the wrong tool.

Tool A Tool B Confidence Why they collide
check_domain explain_check low Request verbs like 'check/run the SSL on example.com' map to check_domain, while 'explain/why does the DMARC check matter' maps to explain_check; the intents are usually distinguishable, but a terse task such as 'tell me about the SSL check' could pull either a live scan or an explanation.
check_domain list_checks low 'What checks run on example.com' could be read as either running the live checker on the domain (check_domain) or enumerating available checks (list_checks); however list_checks requires no domain and describes itself as a catalog, which usually disambiguates.
list_checks explain_check medium Both descriptions share 'why it matters': a user asking 'explain the checks / why do these checks matter' could plausibly get the overview (list_checks) versus a per-check deep dive (explain_check), and the target check id is needed to reliably pick explain_check.

Compare the field

One score is useful.
The evidence makes it actionable.

Back to the leaderboard