Loading the registry…
An MCP server exposing tools, resources, and prompts to browse, search, and recommend books from a local dataset.
We found this by crawling public sources and nobody has attested to it. That is how most of the registry gets here, and it is not a mark against the artifact — it only means no authenticated act of publication is on record. An artifact can be the vendor's own and still appear here.
Choose your runtime: the CLI writes the mcpServers config entry for that target.
nerlo install --target claude-code -- book-mcp-server
Install respects the composite badge: Clean proceeds, Caution prompts for confirmation, and Flagged is refused. Write operations require an API token.
6 of 11 scanners examined this package. The rest do not apply to it — language, ecosystem and packaging decide which analyzers can say anything, and a scanner that cannot examine an artifact reports nothing rather than passing it.
v2.0.11
2 findings · 9.9s
v0.3.74
6 findings · 1.9s
v0.1.0
0 findings · 4.2s
v0.1.0
0 findings · 4.2s
v0.71.0
18 findings · 0.5s
v2.3.8
19 findings · 2.1s
v1.4.0
None of the entry points this scanner reads were found in this artifact. What each scanner covers
0 findings · 0.2s
vv0.3.2
No Go packages were found in this artifact. What each scanner covers
0 findings · 0.1s
v0.1.0
This scanner found nothing in this artifact that it assesses. What each scanner covers
0 findings · 2.7s
v0.71.0
No container image was published for this artifact. What each scanner covers
0 findings · 0.0s
vv1.6.0
No Go modules were found in this artifact. What each scanner covers
0 findings · 0.1s
1 scan on record. Every scan's full results are retained immutably for 24 months.
| Completed | Composite | Change | Scanners | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 19, 2026 | Flagged43 | — | agentshield ·n/a: not applicablecisco-skill-scanner: completeagent-audit-kit: completenerlo-behavioral: completenerlo-install-instruction: completecapslock ·n/a: not applicablenerlo-multi-source ·n/a: not applicabletrivy: completeosv-scanner: completetrivy_image ·n/a: not applicablegovulncheck ·n/a: not applicable | completed |
Findings in files this artifact installs stand as reported; a model re-read the rest and said which ones it believes are false positives. This is a second opinion published beside the evidence, not a correction to it: the per-scanner reports above are unchanged, every dismissed finding is still listed there at its original severity, and the score and the Flagged badge are computed from those raw severities alone. Nothing below moved them.
Out of 45 findings across every scanner that examined this package.
Not reviewed is not the same as clean. Those 3 findings stand exactly as their scanners reported them, at full severity, as they would have without this review.
The model could have called any of these a false positive and did not.
2 AAK-MCP-SDK-CVE-2026-52869-001
Files: pyproject.toml, uv.lock · reported by agent-audit-kit
1 AAK-DNS-REBIND-002
Files: pyproject.toml · reported by agent-audit-kit
1 AAK-HEALTHCARE-AI-004
Files: data.json · reported by agent-audit-kit
1 AAK-OAUTH-3P-001
Files: pyproject.toml · reported by agent-audit-kit
1 CVE-2025-62727
Files: uv.lock · reported by trivy
1 CVE-2025-66416
Files: uv.lock · reported by trivy
1 CVE-2026-24486
Files: uv.lock · reported by trivy
1 CVE-2026-28684
Files: uv.lock · reported by trivy
1 CVE-2026-40347
Files: uv.lock · reported by trivy
1 CVE-2026-42561
Files: uv.lock · reported by trivy
1 CVE-2026-45409
Files: uv.lock · reported by trivy
1 CVE-2026-48710
Files: uv.lock · reported by trivy
1 CVE-2026-48817
Files: uv.lock · reported by trivy
1 CVE-2026-48818
Files: uv.lock · reported by trivy
1 CVE-2026-52869
Files: uv.lock · reported by trivy
1 CVE-2026-53537
Files: uv.lock · reported by trivy
1 CVE-2026-53538
Files: uv.lock · reported by trivy
1 CVE-2026-53539
Files: uv.lock · reported by trivy
1 CVE-2026-53540
Files: uv.lock · reported by trivy
1 CVE-2026-54282
Files: uv.lock · reported by trivy
1 CVE-2026-54283
Files: uv.lock · reported by trivy
1 CVE-2026-59950
Files: uv.lock · reported by trivy
1 PYSEC-2026-161
Files: /repo/uv.lock · reported by osv-scanner
1 PYSEC-2026-1617
Files: /repo/uv.lock · reported by osv-scanner
1 PYSEC-2026-1852
Files: /repo/uv.lock · reported by osv-scanner
1 PYSEC-2026-1942
Files: /repo/uv.lock · reported by osv-scanner
1 PYSEC-2026-2132
Files: /repo/uv.lock · reported by osv-scanner
1 PYSEC-2026-215
Files: /repo/uv.lock · reported by osv-scanner
1 PYSEC-2026-2270
Files: /repo/uv.lock · reported by osv-scanner
1 PYSEC-2026-2280
Files: /repo/uv.lock · reported by osv-scanner
1 PYSEC-2026-2281
Files: /repo/uv.lock · reported by osv-scanner
1 PYSEC-2026-248
Files: /repo/uv.lock · reported by osv-scanner
1 PYSEC-2026-249
Files: /repo/uv.lock · reported by osv-scanner
1 PYSEC-2026-3036
Files: /repo/uv.lock · reported by osv-scanner
1 PYSEC-2026-3037
Files: /repo/uv.lock · reported by osv-scanner
1 PYSEC-2026-3038
Files: /repo/uv.lock · reported by osv-scanner
1 PYSEC-2026-3039
Files: /repo/uv.lock · reported by osv-scanner
1 PYSEC-2026-3040
Files: /repo/uv.lock · reported by osv-scanner
1 PYSEC-2026-3041
Files: /repo/uv.lock · reported by osv-scanner
1 PYSEC-2026-3482
Files: /repo/uv.lock · reported by osv-scanner
1 PYSEC-2026-3483
Files: /repo/uv.lock · reported by osv-scanner
3 The model called these false positives and our own check did not agree, so the dismissal was refused.
Rules: AAK-SEC-MD-001, SOCIAL_ENG_VAGUE_DESCRIPTION, MANIFEST_MISSING_LICENSE · Files: SECURITY.md, /repo/SKILL.md · reported by agent-audit-kit, cisco-skill-scanner
High-severity vulnerabilities, including network egress and critical CVEs.
The artifact exhibits high-severity vulnerabilities, including three instances of network egress capability in `server.py` and a DNS rebinding issue in `pyproject.toml`. Two high-severity findings point to an SDK vulnerability (AAK-MCP-SDK-CVE-2026-52869-001) affecting `pyproject.toml` and `uv.lock`. Additionally, numerous other high-severity CVEs are present in dependencies listed within `uv.lock`. These findings collectively indicate potential for unauthorized network communication and compromise through vulnerable components.
Concern level assessed by the review: High. This is the review's scale, not the registry badge.
Reviewed by gemini-2.5-flash. The model sees the findings, not your code, and cannot change a score.