A pasteable skeleton generated from the repository name. Check the project README for the exact package and arguments.
Star count
1 ★ · Jiangw2718i/frisk · read from the GitHub search API · (checked 2026-10-16 20:00:20)
Source
collected from the punkpeye/awesome-mcp-servers list · type: MCP server
Harvest history
first seen 2026-10-09 · last seen 2026-10-16 · seen 32× · listed by 7 sources
Score
score 703 · 1 ★ · 7 sources · mcp
FAQ (answers come from our records)
How do I install it?
We did not find an install command for this repository (our install coverage is only about 4%). Check its README or releases page.
Who is it for?
We filed it under these tags: MCP 服务. The tags come from the entry itself, not a taxonomy we imposed.
Who maintains it?
repository Jiangw2718i/frisk;first catalogued 2026-10-09;last seen 2026-10-16。There is no official certification or quality rating here — we record sources and dates only.
**Pre-transaction risk screening for autonomous AI agents.** Before your agent pays an x402 seller or calls an unfamiliar tool, ask Frisk whether the counterparty is trustworthy and whether the transaction fits your policy. Frisk returns a verdict — allow, review, or block — with a trust score and human-readable reasons. It is advisory: your agent stays in control of the decision. Surfaces | Surface | Package | Source | | -------------- | ---------------------- | ---------------------------- | | TypeScript SDK | frisk-screen (npm) | typescript/ | | Python SDK | frisk-screen (PyPI) | python/ | | MCP server | frisk-mcp (npm) | mcp/ | Both SDKs expose the same model: a Client with a screen() call, a lite mode that runs locally with zero dependencies, and an optional hosted mode for reputation history and live threat intelligence. MCP server For agents that cannot import a library, and for asking the question interactively, the same checks are available as an MCP server exposing one tool, screen_payment: No API key and no account: with no configuration it screens entirely on your machine. It is listed in the MCP registry as dev.tryfrisk/frisk. An MCP tool runs only when a model chooses to call it, so a check the model can skip is a weaker guarantee than the same check on the code path that signs the payment. Where the money actually moves, prefer the SDK. Details in mcp/. Lite mode vs. hosted | | Lite (default) | Hosted (API key) | | ---------- | ------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------- | | Runs | Locally, offline | Frisk API | | Signals | Public, structural checks only | Reputation graph, trained models, threat feed | | Confidence | Always low | Rises with coverage | | Cost | Free | Usage-based | Lite mode catches obvious problems — malformed counterparties, payTo swaps, insecure endpoints, policy violations, and a small seed blocklist — without a network call. The hosted API (https://api.tryfrisk.dev) adds reputation history and continuously updated threat intelligence. What a verdict covers Frisk screens who you are paying. An allow means nothing disqualifying was found by the checks you gave it enough information to run: the counterparty parses as an address and is not on the blocklist, the payTo the endpoint asked for matches the counterparty you named, the endpoint is served over HTTPS, and the amount and asset fall inside the policy you supplied. A check whose input you leave out does not run and does not fail — omit observedPayTo and no payTo comparison happens. In hosted mode an allow also means no adverse reputation history was found. It says nothing about what comes back. Whether the response matches the shape you expected, contains the data you paid for, or is worth the price is a separate question, and Frisk deliberately does not answer it. Verifying the