plausible-mcp (The-Focus-AI/plausible-mcp) is an MCP server listed on the M8ven Trust Index. It scores 29 out of 100, grade F. It declares 4 tools. No publisher has claimed this listing.

F
Warning
29/100

plausible-mcp

Connect your plausible account to your llms

Warning. Serious findings were identified. Review the full report before connecting. 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

The-Focus-AI

Source: github_topic · also listed on 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

The grade above is for the source repository. Registries can serve a different version, so we mark the ones we were not able to read.

// key findings
⚠️
Tool descriptions don’t match what handlers do
3 tools describe read intent but their handlers mutate — list_sites (line 33: execSync(); analyze_page (line 33: execSync(); get_traffic (line 33: execSync()
🚨
Known vulnerabilities in dependencies: 1 critical, 2 high
Affects packages this MCP installs at runtime. Upgrade or remove the affected dependency.
🔐
You'll be asked for 2 credentials: OPENROUTER_API_KEY, PLAUSIBLE_API_KEY
These are read from process.env at runtime. Make sure you trust where they’ll be sent.
// tools this server exposes4 tools

These names and descriptions are the publisher's own, read from the source code. We print them as written. Our assessment is the findings above, not this list.

list_sites

List all sites in your Plausible account

get_breakdown
analyze_page

Get detailed analytics for a specific page

get_traffic

Get traffic analytics for a site using structured parameters

// known CVEs in dependencies1 critical2 high1 low

Disclosed vulnerabilities in this server's declared npm dependencies (via OSV). Whether each is reachable depends on the installed versions.

criticalvitest@3.1.1GHSA-5xrq-8626-4rwp

When Vitest UI server is listening, arbitrary file can be read and executed

high@modelcontextprotocol/sdk@1.8.0GHSA-8r9q-7v3j-jr4g

Anthropic's MCP TypeScript SDK has a ReDoS vulnerability

high@modelcontextprotocol/sdk@1.8.0GHSA-w48q-cv73-mx4w

Model Context Protocol (MCP) TypeScript SDK does not enable DNS rebinding protection by default

Vercel’s AI SDK's filetype whitelists can be bypassed when uploading files

Depend on this server? Get alerted when its CVEs change.Watch this server free →
// 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.
configAPI_DEBUG
🔐 secretOPENROUTER_API_KEY
🔐 secretPLAUSIBLE_API_KEY
configPLAUSIBLE_API_URL
// 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

4/4 tools missing one or more hints — list_sites (missing: readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint); get_breakdown (missing: readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint); analyze_page (missing: readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint), +1 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.

Descriptions match behaviour

3 tools describe read intent but their handlers mutate — list_sites (line 33: execSync(); analyze_page (line 33: execSync(); get_traffic (line 33: execSync()

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

Tool inputs are validated

Only 1/4 tool handlers declare input schemas (25%)

Declare an inputSchema with zod/joi/yup on every tool definition.

Tool test coverage

3/4 tools referenced in tests (75%)

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

Shell command execution

2 calls in production code run through a shell (src/server.ts:33, src/cli.ts:27)

Prefer library functions over shell-outs. If you must shell out, ensure all inputs are properly escaped.

Production dependencies are patched

0 critical, 2 high severity in production deps — @modelcontextprotocol/sdk@1.8.0 (high), @modelcontextprotocol/sdk@1.8.0 (high)

Run npm audit fix, or upgrade the affected packages to a non-vulnerable version.

Dev dependencies

1 critical/high in dev-only deps (does not ship to users)

Upgrade dev dependencies when convenient.

Dependency freshness

1/10 production deps stale: cli-table3@2024-05-12 (2.3y)

Tool description accuracy

3 tools have description/behavior mismatches: list_sites: description implies read-only but handler writes/deletes/executes; analyze_page: description implies read-only but handler writes/deletes/executes; get_traffic: 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 9 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 Verified](https://m8ven.ai/badge/mcp/the-focus-ai/plausible-mcp?variant=verified)](https://m8ven.ai/mcp/the-focus-ai/plausible-mcp)
Shows verification status without the grade. Want the grade badge instead? Remove ?variant=verified from the URL.
commit: f8515adbb8af2255419a9eecb1a96a180db541c6
code hash: 9c7a9322b57fe098d615ab939778bcb572925d2814515bab9ceb1e97b9142b40
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