agentshield
MCP ServerFreeAI agent security scanner. Detect vulnerabilities in agent configurations, MCP servers, and tool permissions. Available as CLI, GitHub Action, ECC plugin, and GitHub App integration. 🛡️
Capabilities17 decomposed
static configuration vulnerability scanning with 102+ rule registry
Medium confidenceDiscovers Claude-related configuration files (settings.json, mcp.json, CLAUDE.md) across the filesystem and runs them through a curated registry of 102+ static analysis rules organized by threat category (secrets, permissions, hooks, MCP, prompt injection). Each rule produces a Finding object with severity level, vulnerability description, and remediation steps, enabling systematic detection of misconfigurations before runtime.
Implements a domain-specific rule registry tailored to Claude Code + MCP threat model (102+ rules covering secrets, permissions, hooks, supply chain, prompt injection) rather than generic SAST tools; rules are organized by vulnerability category and include built-in remediation guidance specific to agent configurations
More specialized for AI agent security than generic code scanners (Semgrep, Snyk) because it understands MCP server semantics, hook injection patterns, and prompt-based capability escalation unique to agent architectures
hardcoded secrets detection with multi-provider pattern matching
Medium confidenceScans configuration files for exposed API keys, tokens, and private keys using pattern matching rules for Anthropic, OpenAI, AWS, and other providers. Detects both common formats (e.g., sk-* prefixes) and entropy-based anomalies in string values, flagging findings with severity levels and remediation steps recommending environment variable substitution or secret management tools.
Combines provider-specific pattern matching (Anthropic sk-*, OpenAI sk-*, AWS AKIA*) with entropy-based anomaly detection to catch both well-known secret formats and custom tokens; integrates with AgentShield's Finding system to provide context-aware remediation (e.g., 'use ANTHROPIC_API_KEY environment variable instead')
More targeted for agent configurations than generic secret scanners (git-secrets, Snyk) because it understands where secrets appear in MCP server definitions and hook configurations, not just source code
supply chain verification with source authenticity and maintenance status checks
Medium confidenceValidates the authenticity and trustworthiness of MCP server sources by cross-referencing against known-good registries, checking maintainer reputation, and verifying code signatures. Assesses maintenance status (last update, active development, community engagement) to identify abandoned or unmaintained servers that pose supply chain risks. Integrates with GitHub API to gather maintainer and repository metadata.
Integrates with GitHub API to gather maintainer metadata, repository activity, and code signatures; assesses both source authenticity (is this really from the claimed maintainer?) and maintenance status (is this actively developed?) to identify supply chain risks beyond just CVE databases
More thorough than generic dependency scanners because it validates source authenticity and maintenance status, not just known vulnerabilities; provides context about maintainer reputation and project health
vulnerability severity scoring and risk prioritization engine
Medium confidenceAggregates findings from all scanning modules (static rules, deep scan, taint analysis, injection testing, sandbox monitoring) and computes a composite vulnerability severity score based on exploitability, impact, and blast radius. Prioritizes findings for remediation using a scoring engine that considers attack complexity, required privileges, and potential damage. Generates risk reports with remediation guidance ranked by severity.
Implements a composite scoring engine that combines findings from multiple analysis modules (static rules, deep scan, taint analysis, injection testing, sandbox) into a unified risk score; prioritizes remediation based on exploitability and impact rather than just rule severity
More sophisticated than simple rule-based severity assignment because it considers attack complexity, required privileges, and blast radius; aggregates multiple analysis techniques into a unified risk metric
miniclaw secure agent runtime with tool whitelist and egress firewall
Medium confidenceProvides a hardened, minimal agent runtime (MiniClaw) that enforces security policies at execution time. Implements a tool whitelist that only allows explicitly approved tools, path sanitization for file access, and an egress firewall that prevents unauthorized network requests. Acts as a secure alternative to standard agent setups, with hooks into the agent lifecycle to validate tool calls against a RuntimePolicy before execution.
Implements a minimal, hardened agent runtime (MiniClaw) that enforces security policies at execution time through tool whitelisting, path sanitization, and egress firewall; integrates with AgentShield's policy definitions to enforce detected security requirements
More practical than relying solely on static analysis because it enforces security policies at runtime; more lightweight than full sandboxing because it only restricts specific dangerous operations rather than isolating the entire runtime
ci/cd integration with github actions and baseline quality gates
Medium confidenceProvides GitHub Action integration that runs AgentShield scans automatically on pull requests and commits. Supports baseline comparison to detect regressions (new vulnerabilities introduced), quality gates that fail builds if severity thresholds are exceeded, and watch mode that alerts on configuration changes. Integrates with GitHub's status checks and pull request reviews to block merges with critical vulnerabilities.
Integrates with GitHub Actions to run AgentShield scans automatically on commits/PRs; supports baseline comparison to detect regressions and quality gates that fail builds if severity thresholds are exceeded; provides GitHub App integration for enhanced permissions and pull request review comments
More integrated than running AgentShield manually because it automates scanning and blocks risky merges; more practical than generic security scanning tools because it understands agent-specific vulnerabilities
auto-fix engine with configuration remediation and policy initialization
Medium confidenceAutomatically generates and applies fixes for detected vulnerabilities, including moving hardcoded secrets to environment variables, removing wildcard tool permissions, sanitizing hook code, and pinning MCP server versions. Provides an initialization mode that creates secure baseline configurations from scratch. Uses code transformation patterns to modify configuration files safely while preserving structure and comments.
Implements code transformation patterns that safely modify configuration files to fix detected vulnerabilities (moving secrets to env vars, removing wildcard permissions, pinning versions) while preserving file structure and comments; provides initialization mode for creating secure baseline configurations
More practical than manual remediation because it automates fix application; more careful than generic code transformers because it understands agent configuration semantics and preserves structure
organizational policy enforcement with custom rules and compliance reporting
Medium confidenceEnables organizations to define custom security policies that extend AgentShield's built-in rules, enforcing organization-specific requirements (e.g., 'all MCP servers must be from approved registry', 'no external network access'). Generates compliance reports showing which agents meet organizational policies and which require remediation. Integrates with policy management systems to enforce policies across multiple agent projects.
Extends AgentShield's built-in rules with organization-specific policies that can enforce custom security requirements; generates compliance reports showing which agents meet organizational policies and provides remediation guidance for non-compliant configurations
More flexible than fixed rule sets because it allows organizations to define custom policies; more practical than manual compliance audits because it automates policy checking and reporting
skills health system with dependency tracking and update notifications
Medium confidenceMonitors the health of MCP servers and agent skills by tracking dependency versions, maintenance status, and security updates. Provides notifications when new versions are available, when dependencies become unmaintained, or when security patches are released. Maintains a skills registry that tracks which agents use which skills and enables impact analysis for updates.
Implements continuous monitoring of MCP server health (maintenance status, security updates, version availability) and provides impact analysis showing which agents would be affected by skill updates; integrates with notification systems to alert teams about critical updates
More proactive than manual dependency tracking because it continuously monitors health and provides notifications; more practical than generic dependency management tools because it understands agent-specific skill dependencies
permissive tool permission analysis with wildcard and deny-list detection
Medium confidenceAnalyzes agent tool permission definitions to identify overly broad access patterns, including wildcard permissions (e.g., Bash(*)), missing deny lists for destructive operations, and privilege escalation vectors. Uses pattern matching on tool definitions to flag configurations where an agent could execute arbitrary shell commands or access sensitive files without restrictions.
Implements agent-specific permission semantics (understanding that Bash(*) is dangerous, that file access should be path-restricted, that network tools need egress controls) rather than generic RBAC analysis; integrates with MiniClaw runtime to enforce detected policies at execution time
More specialized than generic IAM policy analyzers (AWS IAM Access Analyzer) because it understands agent tool semantics and the specific attack surface of autonomous code execution
hook injection vulnerability detection with command and exfiltration pattern analysis
Medium confidenceAnalyzes PreToolUse and SessionStart hooks for command injection vulnerabilities and data exfiltration patterns. Scans hook code for dangerous patterns (shell metacharacters, subprocess calls, network requests) and detects capability escalation attempts where hooks could bypass tool restrictions or leak system prompts. Uses AST-level or regex-based pattern matching to identify risky hook implementations.
Specifically targets hook-based attack vectors in Claude Code (PreToolUse/SessionStart) rather than generic code injection detection; understands that hooks are a privileged execution context that can bypass tool restrictions, making them high-value targets for exploitation
More targeted than generic code injection scanners because it understands the specific hook lifecycle in Claude Code agents and the privilege escalation risk they represent
mcp supply chain risk assessment with version pinning and source verification
Medium confidenceAnalyzes MCP server configurations to identify supply chain vulnerabilities including unpinned versions, npx auto-installs, and risky server sources. Cross-references servers against a threat intelligence database (CVE database) to flag known vulnerable versions. Detects dynamic server loading patterns that could allow injection of malicious servers and validates server source authenticity.
Integrates MCP-specific threat intelligence (understanding that npx auto-installs are risky, that unpinned versions enable supply chain attacks, that MCP servers run with elevated privileges) with CVE database lookups; provides supply chain verification that validates server sources against known-good registries
More specialized than generic dependency scanners (npm audit, Snyk) because it understands MCP server semantics and the specific risk of dynamic server loading in agent configurations
prompt injection and capability escalation detection with multi-chain analysis
Medium confidenceDetects prompt injection vulnerabilities and capability escalation attacks in agent prompts, including 'Russian Doll' multi-chain injection vectors where an attacker chains multiple prompts to bypass restrictions. Analyzes prompt definitions for patterns that could allow an attacker to override system instructions, escalate tool access, or manipulate agent behavior. Uses pattern matching and semantic analysis to identify risky prompt structures.
Implements multi-chain injection analysis using Claude 3.5 Opus (in deep scan mode) to simulate 'Russian Doll' attacks where an attacker chains multiple prompts to bypass restrictions; combines static pattern matching with adversarial LLM-based testing to detect both obvious and subtle injection vectors
More sophisticated than generic prompt injection detectors because it understands agent-specific attack patterns (tool escalation, system prompt override, multi-turn manipulation) and uses adversarial LLM testing to find novel injection techniques
deep scan adversarial analysis with three-agent opus pipeline
Medium confidenceActivates an advanced security analysis mode using Claude 3.5 Opus in a three-agent pipeline (Attacker/Defender/Auditor) to simulate real-world exploits against agent configurations. The Attacker agent generates adversarial prompts and attack scenarios, the Defender agent proposes mitigations, and the Auditor agent validates findings. This goes beyond static rules to discover novel vulnerabilities through adversarial reasoning.
Implements a three-agent Opus pipeline (Attacker/Defender/Auditor) that simulates adversarial reasoning rather than relying solely on static rules; the Attacker agent generates novel attack scenarios, Defender proposes mitigations, and Auditor validates findings, enabling discovery of vulnerabilities beyond the static rule registry
More thorough than static analysis tools because it uses adversarial LLM reasoning to discover novel vulnerabilities; more practical than manual security audits because it automates the attack simulation and mitigation validation process
taint analysis for data flow tracking and exfiltration detection
Medium confidencePerforms data flow analysis to track how sensitive data (system prompts, API keys, user inputs) flows through agent configurations, hooks, and tool calls. Identifies potential exfiltration paths where sensitive data could leak to external systems (network requests, logs, tool outputs). Uses taint propagation to mark sensitive sources and detect when tainted data reaches dangerous sinks.
Implements taint analysis specifically for agent data flows, tracking how sensitive data (system prompts, API keys) propagates through hooks, tools, and external calls; identifies exfiltration paths that static analysis alone would miss by modeling data dependencies
More specialized than generic data flow analyzers because it understands agent-specific data sources (system prompts, tool outputs) and sinks (network requests, logs, tool parameters)
injection testing with adversarial prompt generation and execution simulation
Medium confidenceGenerates adversarial prompts designed to exploit detected vulnerabilities and simulates their execution against the agent configuration without actually running them. Tests injection vectors including prompt override, tool escalation, and data exfiltration. Uses Claude 3.5 Opus to generate realistic attack prompts and validates whether the agent's security controls would prevent exploitation.
Uses Claude 3.5 Opus to generate realistic adversarial prompts that target detected vulnerabilities, then simulates their execution against the agent configuration to validate whether security controls would prevent exploitation; bridges static analysis findings with practical impact assessment
More practical than static vulnerability detection alone because it validates whether detected vulnerabilities are actually exploitable; more efficient than manual penetration testing because it automates prompt generation and execution simulation
sandbox behavioral analysis with runtime execution monitoring
Medium confidenceExecutes agent configurations in an isolated sandbox environment and monitors their runtime behavior for security violations. Tracks system calls, network requests, file access, and tool invocations to detect whether the agent violates its declared permissions or exhibits suspicious behavior. Compares actual behavior against the declared security policy to identify policy violations.
Executes agent configurations in an isolated sandbox and monitors runtime behavior (system calls, network requests, file access) against declared security policies; detects policy violations and behavioral anomalies that static analysis cannot find by observing actual execution
More comprehensive than static analysis because it validates runtime behavior; more practical than manual testing because it automates behavior monitoring and policy violation detection
Capabilities are decomposed by AI analysis. Each maps to specific user intents and improves with match feedback.
Related Artifactssharing capabilities
Artifacts that share capabilities with agentshield, ranked by overlap. Discovered automatically through the match graph.
Semgrep
Static analysis — custom rules for bugs and security, 30+ languages, AI-powered triage.
Semgrep CLI
AI-powered static analysis for security.
Aikido Security
All-in-one appsec platform with AI-powered triage.
Coderbuds
Coderbuds is a code review tool that automates the code review process, providing feedback and recommendations to...
Sourcery
AI code review agent for pull requests.
PR-Agent
AI-powered tool for automated PR analysis, feedback, suggestions and more.
Best For
- ✓teams building Claude Code agents who need pre-deployment security validation
- ✓developers integrating MCP servers and want to prevent supply chain attacks
- ✓organizations enforcing security baselines across multiple agent configurations
- ✓developers working with Claude Code who want to prevent credential leakage
- ✓DevOps teams implementing pre-commit hooks for agent configuration validation
- ✓security teams auditing third-party agent configurations for exposure risks
- ✓teams using community MCP servers who need to validate trustworthiness
- ✓organizations with strict supply chain security policies
Known Limitations
- ⚠static analysis only — cannot detect runtime behavioral exploits or zero-day patterns not in rule registry
- ⚠requires files to be discoverable on local filesystem — no remote scanning of cloud-hosted configs
- ⚠rule false-positive rate documented in false-positive-audit.md; some rules may flag legitimate patterns
- ⚠pattern-based detection may miss obfuscated or custom secret formats not in the rule set
- ⚠cannot detect secrets already rotated or invalidated — only identifies presence
- ⚠high false-positive rate on legitimate long alphanumeric strings; requires manual review
Requirements
Input / Output
UnfragileRank
UnfragileRank is computed from adoption signals, documentation quality, ecosystem connectivity, match graph feedback, and freshness. No artifact can pay for a higher rank.
Repository Details
Last commit: Apr 17, 2026
About
AI agent security scanner. Detect vulnerabilities in agent configurations, MCP servers, and tool permissions. Available as CLI, GitHub Action, ECC plugin, and GitHub App integration. 🛡️
Categories
Alternatives to agentshield
Are you the builder of agentshield?
Claim this artifact to get a verified badge, access match analytics, see which intents users search for, and manage your listing.
Get the weekly brief
New tools, rising stars, and what's actually worth your time. No spam.
Data Sources
Looking for something else?
Search →