Sealmark
Unreleased: not public yet. Maintainers have not reviewed this result.

Results / @modelcontextprotocol/server-sequential-thinking

@modelcontextprotocol/server-sequential-thinking

version tested 1.0.0npmtested 2026-10-13Sealmark 0.2.1methodology 0.3-draftSTANDARD run1 tools
A
Protocol4/4 points

Coverage: hygiene only (0 of 1 tools reached with a valid call). Only protocol hygiene was graded, so the A says little about what the tools do.

Protocol checks

CheckVerdictWhat happened
protocol
Valid MCP handshake and tool schemas
passhandshake ok, 1 well-formed tool(s)
tool-poisoningcritical
No tool-poisoning indicators in tool metadata
passscanned 1 tool definition(s), including parameter text: nothing suspicious
robust-input
Survives malformed tool input
pass4 invalid call(s) rejected cleanly
secret-echocritical
No environment secret echoed in responses
passcanary secrets absent from tools/list and 4 captured response(s)

What was not covered

Run it yourself

Started with the standard settings like this; put it in sealmark.yaml as the server:

npx -y @modelcontextprotocol/server-sequential-thinking@1.0.0

Each of 613 verdicts was checked independently, and Sealmark was wrong on some: how reliable Sealmark is.

Think a verdict is wrong, or want a server removed? Email disclosure@sealmark.dev with the server version. We recheck, correct the page if we were wrong, and add your reply. See the disclosure policy.