SkillAudit report — honeycombio/honeycomb-mcp
Scanned 2026-04-24 by SkillAudit v0.2 (static checks + LLM-assisted prompt-injection red-team).
Commit: cb3a233 · Stars: 43 · Days since last push: 246
LLM prompt-injection probe: no-tool-surface
Overall grade: F (30/100)
| Axis | Score | Grade | |
|---|---|---|---|
| security | 40/100 | F | ❌ |
| permissions | 100/100 | A | ✅ |
| credentials | 30/100 | F | ❌ |
| maintenance | 60/100 | D | ❌ |
| compatibility | 100/100 | A | ✅ |
| docs | 80/100 | B | ⚠️ |
Security findings
Production sources:
- HIGH
src/api/client.ts:156— HTTP client call with user-controlled argument 'url' — no URL allowlist / validation found in file
const response = await fetch(url, {
- HIGH
src/config.ts:101— Template-string URL with interpolation — no validation possible on composed string
const response = await fetch(\${env.apiEndpoint}/1/auth\, { headers });
Permissions
_No findings on this axis._
Credentials
Production sources:
- HIGH
eval/scripts/run-eval.ts:623— console.* of process.env — entire env leaks to stdout/stderr and LLM context
console.log(\Using MCP server command: ${process.env.MCP_SERVER_COMMAND}\);
- HIGH
eval/scripts/run-eval.ts:628— console.* of process.env — entire env leaks to stdout/stderr and LLM context
console.log(\Using MCP server URL: ${process.env.MCP_SERVER_URL}\);
- WARN
.env.example— .env file present in repo tree — verify it's a template, not real secrets
.env.example
Maintenance
Production sources:
- WARN
(meta)— No push to default branch in 246 days
246 days
- HIGH
(meta)— Repository is archived — no fixes will be issued upstream
archived
Compatibility
_No findings on this axis._
Documentation
Production sources:
- WARN
(meta)— No SECURITY.md — no disclosure channel for vulnerabilities
missing
- WARN
package.json— package.json missing repository field
no repository
Methodology
SkillAudit v0.2 clones the repo at the provided ref (default: default branch, HEAD) into an ephemeral sandbox, runs six static checks over .js/.ts/.py sources, queries the GitHub API for maintenance signals, and runs an LLM-assisted prompt-injection red-team over the MCP tool surface. Each axis is scored against the rubric at
The prompt-injection axis extracts each server.tool(...) / @app.tool registration + the first ~60 lines of handler body, hands them to Claude Haiku 4.5 with a red-team system prompt, and asks for structured findings on untrusted-content flow into tool responses. One API call per scan, bounded at ~15K input tokens.
How to improve this grade
- Security — static: validate tool-input URLs against an allowlist before fetch/axios calls; use
execFilewith argv arrays instead ofexecwith template strings; never pass untrusted strings tosubprocesswithshell=True. - Security — prompt injection: never return fetched web-page / file / email content verbatim in a tool response. Wrap with a framing marker (e.g.,
<untrusted-content>...</untrusted-content>), summarize rather than inline, and never let untrusted content share a turn with credentials or other tool output. - Credentials findings: redact env-var reads before log lines and error messages; treat any string that ends up in a tool response as public.
- Maintenance: if the repo is inactive, document the maintenance model — "MCP tool, no breaking changes expected" is a legitimate signal.
- Docs: add a README install + usage section with a copy-pasteable command; add a SECURITY.md with a disclosure channel.
_Report generated by skillaudit.dev_
Want your repo audited?
First 100 audits go to waitlist signups in order. The engine runs against public GitHub URLs today.
Join the waitlist →