Loading the registry…
MCP server for Jupyter notebook interaction compatible with Claude Code
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.
100 critical findings reported by cisco-skill-scanner. The composite score alone does not reflect this — read the per-scanner reports below.
Choose your runtime: the CLI writes the mcpServers config entry for that target.
nerlo install --target claude-code -- claude-code-notebook-mcp
Install respects the composite badge: Clean proceeds, Caution prompts for confirmation, and Flagged is refused. Write operations require an API token.
5 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.
v1.4.0
0 findings · 0.9s
v2.0.11
335 findings · 33.7s
v0.3.74
6 findings · 3.2s
v0.1.0
0 findings · 4.5s
v0.1.0
0 findings · 4.5s
vv0.3.2
No Go packages were found in this artifact. What each scanner covers
0 findings · 0.2s
v0.1.0
This scanner found nothing in this artifact that it assesses. What each scanner covers
0 findings · 2.3s
No report in this scan: govulncheck, osv-scanner, trivy, trivy_image.
1 scan on record. Every scan's full results are retained immutably for 24 months.
| Completed | Composite | Change | Scanners | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 20, 2026 | Scan Halted | — | agentshield: completecisco-skill-scanner: completeagent-audit-kit: completenerlo-behavioral: completenerlo-install-instruction: completecapslock ·n/a: not applicablenerlo-multi-source ·n/a: not applicable | rejected |
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 341 findings across every scanner that examined this package. None of the 100 findings rated critical by their scanner were dismissed.
Not reviewed is not the same as clean. Those 323 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.
18 LOW_ANALYZABILITY
Files: /repo/node_modules/graceful-fs, /repo/node_modules/jsonfile, /repo/node_modules/@types/node and 15 more · reported by cisco-skill-scanner
321 The model's answer could not be read.
Rules: COMMAND_INJECTION_EVAL, COMMAND_INJECTION_JS_CHILD_PROCESS, COMMAND_INJECTION_JS_FUNCTION_CONSTRUCTOR and 15 more · Files: /repo/node_modules/@types/node/child_process.d.ts, /repo/node_modules/@types/node/cluster.d.ts, /repo/node_modules/@types/node/net.d.ts and 74 more · reported by cisco-skill-scanner, agent-audit-kit
2 The model called these false positives and our own check did not agree, so the dismissal was refused.
Rules: DATA_EXFIL_JS_NETWORK · Files: /repo/node_modules/@types/node/https.d.ts · reported by cisco-skill-scanner
Artifact contains critical command injection vulnerabilities and exposes sensitive data.
The artifact exhibits critical command injection vulnerabilities, including `COMMAND_INJECTION_EVAL` and `COMMAND_INJECTION_JS_CHILD_PROCESS`, which could lead to shell execution. A critical `bearer` finding is present in `/repo/src/client.js`, indicating a significant security risk. Additionally, high severity findings for `SECRET_JWT_TOKEN` suggest potential credential access. The artifact also includes informational findings related to network egress and file system access, indicating capabilities for data exfiltration.
Concern level assessed by the review: Critical. 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.
Showing 24 of 24; the rest are in the per-scanner reports above.