by i12bp8 · MCP Server · ★ 386
Last updated: · Indexed by AgentSkillsHub · Auto-synced every 8h
None of the 42 rules matched — no credential harvesting, no data exfiltration, no curl-pipe-shell installer. Scanned against 42 published rules built on the SlowMist agent-security taxonomy, refreshed every 8 hours. Full audit →
The quality score combines nine heuristic checks of the repo and its README: completeness, clarity, specificity, examples, structure, agent readiness, step-by-step content, instruction quality and security notes. It rates how well the project explains itself to an agent, not the code.
| Stars | 386 |
| Forks | 75 |
| Language | Python |
| Category | MCP Server |
| License | MIT |
| Quality Score | 69/100 |
| Last Updated | 2026-10-15 |
| Created | 2026-10-13 |
| Platforms | claude-code, mcp, python |
| Est. Tokens | ~17k |
Website · Install · How it works · Public decomps · Agents · Decompile together
Looking for a decomp.wtf alternative? If you're comparing decomp.wtf with other mcp server tools, these 6 projects are the closest alternatives on Agent Skills Hub — ranked by topic overlap, star count, and community traction.
GoldenEye 007 (N64, 1997) as a native PC game for Windows, Linux, Steam Deck and macOS. Built from the open de
From-scratch, byte-matching decompilation of Super Mario 64 DS into C/C++, with a live progress atlas and matc
don't reverse engineer smth twice. 12,000+ open-source tools built by reverse engineering closed apps, APIs, d
Automate Ghidra reverse engineering from the command line — headless analysis, decompilation, and structured J
Awesome Reverse Engineering Anything: tools, projects, case studies and research papers for websites, games, a
Connect Cursor, Copilot & Claude AI directly to Cheat Engine via MCP. Automate reverse engineering, pointer sc
Explore other popular mcp server tools:
Grades come from a rule-based scan built on the SlowMist agent-security taxonomy: 42 published rules, covering credential harvesting, data exfiltration, curl | sh installers and more. It is a first-layer scan, not a manual audit — we say so rather than overstate it.
The scale of the problem is documented independently: Liu et al. (2026), in a study of 31,132 agent skills, report that 26.1% contain security vulnerabilities. Our own full-catalog census is published as a citable open dataset.
Sources & who's responsible: