pentesting-cyber-mcp

Provides a collection of MCP (Model Context Protocol) server implementations that wrap many common cybersecurity/pentesting tools (e.g., nmap, nuclei, sqlmap, zap, trivy, etc.) so they can be executed via an MCP-compatible client, including a “unified” server to access multiple tools through a single MCP connection.

Evaluated Mar 30, 2026 (21d ago)
Repo ↗ DevTools mcp model-context-protocol pentesting security-tools automation reconnaissance vulnerability-scanning devtools
⚙ Agent Friendliness
46
/ 100
Can an agent use this?
🔒 Security
25
/ 100
Is it safe for agents?
⚡ Reliability
22
/ 100
Does it work consistently?

Score Breakdown

⚙ Agent Friendliness

MCP Quality
55
Documentation
60
Error Messages
0
Auth Simplicity
85
Rate Limits
0

🔒 Security

TLS Enforcement
50
Auth Strength
10
Scope Granularity
0
Dep. Hygiene
30
Secret Handling
40

Security notice only covers authorized testing and securing API keys, but the README does not describe secure transport (beyond typical HTTPS assumptions), authentication/authorization, least-privilege scoping, audit logging, or secret-handling practices inside the MCP servers. Because it wraps many offensive/security tools, misuse risk is high unless constrained by your surrounding infrastructure.

⚡ Reliability

Uptime/SLA
0
Version Stability
35
Breaking Changes
30
Error Recovery
25
AF Security Reliability

Best When

You have authorized targets and want a standardized way for an MCP client/agent to call multiple local security tools consistently.

Avoid When

You cannot guarantee authorization, operational safety, or proper sandboxing, or you require strict security controls beyond what this repository describes.

Use Cases

  • Automating reconnaissance and vulnerability scanning workflows via an MCP client
  • Integrating common security tooling into agentic/pipeline-based pentesting operations
  • Standardizing tool invocation and outputs behind the MCP protocol for multiple security utilities

Not For

  • Unauthenticated/unauthorized security testing
  • Production systems requiring strong built-in access controls, auditing, or network-level safety mechanisms
  • Environments where running pentesting tools is prohibited or severely restricted

Interface

REST API
No
GraphQL
No
gRPC
No
MCP Server
Yes
SDK
No
Webhooks
No

Authentication

Methods: No documented authentication mechanism for the MCP servers in README (assumes local process usage and relies on environment/client-side controls).
OAuth: No Scopes: No

README shows MCP client configuration that runs local node commands. No explicit auth, user identity, or authorization model is documented for the MCP servers themselves.

Pricing

Free tier: No
Requires CC: No

Repository appears MIT-licensed; no SaaS pricing information is provided.

Agent Metadata

Pagination
none
Idempotent
False
Retry Guidance
Not documented

Known Gotchas

  • Many wrapped tools require privileged execution (root/admin) and may fail or behave differently depending on environment
  • Some tools can be high-noise/impactful (e.g., exploitation/password auditing), so agents need strong safety limits
  • No documented MCP tool schemas, output formats, or error/retry conventions in the README (may vary per server)
  • The MCP integration shown is via starting local processes; agent clients must manage process lifecycles and stdout/stderr parsing correctly

Alternatives

Full Evaluation Report

Comprehensive deep-dive: security analysis, reliability audit, agent experience review, cost modeling, competitive positioning, and improvement roadmap for pentesting-cyber-mcp.

AI-powered analysis · PDF + markdown · Delivered within 30 minutes

$99

Package Brief

Quick verdict, integration guide, cost projections, gotchas with workarounds, and alternatives comparison.

Delivered within 10 minutes

$3

Score Monitoring

Get alerted when this package's AF, security, or reliability scores change significantly. Stay ahead of regressions.

Continuous monitoring

$3/mo

Scores are editorial opinions as of 2026-03-30.

8642
Packages Evaluated
17761
Need Evaluation
586
Need Re-evaluation
Community Powered