Is LuxAlgo MCP server safe?
Yes, with the usual care.
Passed every safety check we run. Maintained, authenticated, reachable, clean scan.
What to know before installing
- highWrite-action tools reachable without authentication
How LuxAlgo MCP compares
Against every graded MCP server, from our own scans and uptime checks. Updated after each scan run.
- Safety score
- 85/100
- higher than 70% of 48,255 servers
- Tools that change things
- 7%
- typical: 0%. Fewer write tools means less an agent can break
- Uptime
- 100%
- of our recent checks; the typical remote server answers 100%
What its tools let an agent do: 38 read · 3 change
Release history: 4 versions in the registry since 2026-08-12, latest 2026-10-25, typically one every 31 days.
Public scan report
scanner v0.1.10 · 2026-11-04 · same rubric, same numbers if you re-run it
1 high1 low
- Code scan60 source files scanned25/25
- Live reliabilityremote reachable in 1147ms20/20
- Tool poisoning41 tool descriptions checked13/15
- Auth qualityopen endpoint exposes 3 write-action tools with no auth3/15
- Maintenancelast push 10 days ago15/15
- Maintainer identityregistry namespace matches repository owner; GitHub account older than a year9/10
Findings (2)
- highWrite-action tools reachable without authentication
auth.open-write - lowUnusually long tool description (over 2,000 characters)
poison.long-descriptiontool propfirms_challenge_rules: …Fetch one directory challenge's complete ruleset (ChallengeSpec), adapted from the live LuxAlgo directory: evaluation steps (profit targets in percent units of the initial account, minimum trading days, time limits); the daily-loss rule with its exact semantics (basis = measured from prior-day balance vs prior-day equity; limitBasis = whether a pct limit is a fixed allowance of the initial balance or recomputed daily from the anchor; evaluation = breached on an intraday touch vs only at the close; includesOpenPnl = whether floating P&L can breach it); the max-loss rule and its drawdown mode (How the max-loss floor behaves - the single most consequential rule difference between firms. 'static-initial': floor fixed at initial balance minus the limit; never moves (classic CFD two-step). 'trailing-realized-eod': floor ratchets up with end-of-day balance highs; intraday highs do not move it. 'trailing-intraday-unrealized': floor trails the peak unrealized equity intraday and never stops trailing (futures-style; the most-miscalculated rule in the industry: it cuts pass probability dramatically). 'trailing-locks-at-initial': trails intraday peak equity until the floor reaches the initial balance, then freezes (common futures variant). Locking is also composable: locksAtInitial adds the same lock to an EOD trail, and lockOffsetAmount shifts the lock level to initial balance + that amount (e.g. 100 models 'stops trailing $100 above the start').); per-step consistency rules (steps[].consistency.maxBestDayProfitPct - SIMULATED: one outsized day effectively raises the target until the best-day share complies); fees (price, one-time vs monthly billing, reset fee, activation fee, refundable-on-pass); funded terms (profit split percent, payout frequency, first-payout minimum days, and funded.payoutRules - SIMULATED payout gating: minWinningDays, winningDayMinProfit, per-payout caps maxPayoutPctOfProfit/maxPayoutAmount, bufferAmount, and a windowed consistencyMaxBestDayPct gate); flagsNotSimulated (rules the entry declares but the engine does not simulate - material caveats to relay to the user); and sources (the firm-page citation when the directory serves one). The result also carries `provenance` and `inferredFields` - every rule read from free text instead of a structured column is named there; relay them and treat the firm's page as authoritative. The returned `challenge` object is exactly the shape the simulation tools accept as inline `spec`: copy it, change a rule, and re-simulate to quantify how a rule variation moves pass probability and EV. UNITS: every *Pct rule field and every percent-mode risk value is in PERCENT UNITS (5 = 5%, 0.5 = 0.5%). The one exception is winRate, which is a FRACTION in [0, 1] (0.55 = 55% winners). Probabilities in results are fractions in [0, 1]. DATA SOURCE & PROVENANCE: firm data comes live from LuxAlgo's public, keyless prop-firm directory API - the data behind luxalgo.com/prop-firms. Rule semantics are used verbatim where the directory serves structured rule columns; where it serves only free text, semantics are inferred ONLY when one reasonable reading exists, and every inferred field is disclosed in `inferredFields` (provenance 'directory+inferred') - relay those to the user next to any numbers. Challenges whose loss rules cannot be established are refused as not simulatable rather than guessed. Firms change rules; each firm's own page is always authoritative. NOTE: this returns the simulatable encoding of one challenge's rules; the directory listing with every captured field, plus live offers, is propfirms_get and propfirms_search_challenges.…
Overall 85/100. Components that don't apply are left out of the denominator. Any critical finding is an F.RubricAppeal a findingJSON
Other servers that do what LuxAlgo MCP does
- World MonitorReal-time global intelligence on conflict, markets, energy, trade, shipping and cyber. 100 tools.not reviewedWidely usedA