D
Emerging
56/100
5 hours ago

wsl-bridge-mcp

A Model Context Protocol server that lets Windows-side AI agents operate on WSL distributions like a local environment, providing file read/write/edit, command execution, process management, log streaming, and content search via UNC paths and persistent shells.

Emerging. No concerning findings. Grades remain capped until the project builds reputation through adoption. Grades reflect the full trust pyramid: code, verification depth, and reputation. New projects cap at C until adoption is earned.

How we verified

⚡ Live Monitored: not connected

Verified is a snapshot. Live keeps it current, and builds your track record.

⚡ Connect GitHub → continuous verification on every pushwhy connect →

Who stands behind it

Darling209

Source: Glama

Is this your MCP?

Claim it to get a verified publisher badge, a free copy of our full audit findings, and direct contact for any high-priority issues we find. Or connect your repo for our deepest verification, Live Monitored: read-only, revoke anytime. What we access →

Install from

M8ven verifies MCPs across every public registry — install directly from whichever one you prefer.

// key findings
⚠️
Tool descriptions don’t match what handlers do
2 tools describe read intent but their handlers mutate — get_system_info (line 107: shell.exec(script, { timeoutMs: ctx.config.scriptTimeoutMs })); search_files (line 68: shell.exec(cmd, { timeoutMs: ctx.config.scriptTimeoutMs }))
No credential exfiltration, no sensitive file access, no obfuscation
Static analysis found nothing flowing your secrets to unexpected places.
// environment variables
To run this server yourself, you supply these values. They go in your own MCP client configuration and stay on your machine. The secret label means the value is sensitive, not that the server mishandles it.
configWSL_BRIDGE_CONFIG
// quality suggestions

Tool annotations

No tools have read-only/destructive annotations

Add readOnlyHint or destructiveHint annotations to every tool so hosts can warn users before invoking.

All four hints declared on every tool

28/28 tools missing one or more hints — list_distros (missing: readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint); get_system_info (missing: readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint); check_wsl_status (missing: readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint), +25 more. OpenAI's directory rejects tools where any of the four hints are missing or non-boolean.

For every tool, set all four hints (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint) to explicit true/false values that match the handler’s actual behaviour.

Destructive tools are labelled

1 tool perform destructive updates without destructiveHint — diagnose deletes at line 170 (fs.unlink(probeUnc))

Add destructiveHint:true to any tool whose handler calls .delete(), .upsert(), .update(), unlink, rm, DELETE, DROP, REPLACE INTO, or any operation that overwrites existing data.

Descriptions match behaviour

2 tools describe read intent but their handlers mutate — get_system_info (line 107: shell.exec(script, { timeoutMs: ctx.config.scriptTimeoutMs })); search_files (line 68: shell.exec(cmd, { timeoutMs: ctx.config.scriptTimeoutMs }))

Rename the tool, rewrite the description, or move the side-effect into a separate clearly-named tool.

License file

No license file

Add a LICENSE file (MIT, Apache-2.0, etc.).

Tool test coverage

20/28 tools referenced in tests (71%)

Write tests that reference each tool by name so every tool has at least one test.

Tool description accuracy

get_system_info: description implies read-only but handler writes/deletes/executes; search_files: description implies read-only but handler writes/deletes/executes

Update tool descriptions to accurately reflect all capabilities — especially write, delete, or execute operations.

Claim the listing to review these findings one by one and send us a correction where you disagree, straight to the team. Claiming also means we tell you when the grade moves, and reach you first if we find anything urgent.

// full audit trail
The findings above are the summary. The full trail, every check we ran, each deduction, the network hosts observed and the dependency advisories, goes to verified publishers, along with an alert whenever a new one lands. Verified publishers can also review each finding and dispute it in one click. Publisher corrections have sharpened several of our checks this month, because the maintainer knows the codebase better than any scanner.
// improvement guidance — verified publishers only
We have 7 concrete improvements we can share with the publisher of this MCP. Each comes with specific guidance to raise the trust score.
// embed badge in your README
[![M8ven Score](https://m8ven.ai/badge/mcp/darling209-wsl-bridge-mcp-10kjme)](https://m8ven.ai/mcp/darling209-wsl-bridge-mcp-10kjme)
Shows your grade and updates automatically. Prefer no grade? Append ?variant=verified to the badge URL.
commit: 3a0ec5ce190f949df3d0286a32cc3e69f6c14826
code hash: a36c66fbf6ec4292000e55ad182397140e2d515c90e763b04338bb78ceaf95ba
verified: 8/21/2026, 2:39:02 AM
view raw JSON →
Check MCPs from inside your assistant
Tool Check · MCP

Vetting this one by hand? Tool Check is an MCP that scores other MCPs. Add it once and ask Claude, ChatGPT, or any MCP client to grade a server, surface CVEs, check the publisher, and suggest safer alternatives — before you install.

https://m8ven.ai/api/mcp/tool-check
check_toolsearch_toolscompare_toolsrecommend_alternativescheck_publisherreport_concern
How to add it →Free · no account needed · works in any MCP client