Is bobmatnyc/claude-mpm-skills/drizzle-migrations safe?

suspiciousmedium confidence
45/100

context safety score

A score of 45/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
80
behavior
79
content
0
graph
57

6 threat patterns detected

high

credential exposure

Found 53 secret pattern match(es) in repository files

low

supply chain

Found 1 install-script pattern(s) in documentation (likely install instructions, not executable)

low

supply chain

Found 1 remote script pattern(s) in documentation (likely install instructions, not executable)

high

typosquat

Skill named 'drizzle-migrations' from personal account 'bobmatnyc' with empty SKILL.md and no actual skill content. 'drizzle-migrations' is the name of a well-known package in the Drizzle ORM ecosystem. The repo 'claude-mpm-skills' also references 'Claude' and 'mpm' (possible typosquat of 'mcp' or 'npm'). Only 15 stars and 2 contributors despite claiming 7.69M installs — install count is implausible for this profile and likely fabricated. Not listed on registry, not org verified. (location: metadata.json: skill_name, full_name)

medium

scope violation

The skill_description field contains 'width=device-width, initial-scale=1' which is an HTML viewport meta tag value, not a legitimate skill description. This suggests the metadata was scraped or injected from HTML rather than authored intentionally, indicating the skill packaging is deceptive or broken. Combined with an empty SKILL.md, this skill has no legitimate documented functionality. (location: metadata.json: skill_description)

high

supply chain

Empty SKILL.md with no skill content, combined with a borrowed well-known package name ('drizzle-migrations'), implausible install metrics (7.69M installs vs 15 stars), and garbled metadata (HTML meta tag as description). This pattern is consistent with a placeholder/squatting package that could be updated later with malicious content after gaining installs through name confusion, or is already being used to inflate trust metrics. (location: SKILL.md (empty), metadata.json)

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/skill/bobmatnyc%2Fclaude-mpm-skills%2Fdrizzle-migrations

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

Common questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this skill in agent workflows.

Is bobmatnyc/claude-mpm-skills/drizzle-migrations safe for AI agents to use?

bobmatnyc/claude-mpm-skills/drizzle-migrations currently scores 45/100 with a suspicious verdict and medium confidence. The goal is to protect agents from high-risk context before they act on it. Treat this as a decision signal: higher scores suggest lower observed risk, while lower scores mean you should add review or block this skill.

How should I interpret the score and verdict?

Use the score as a policy threshold: 80–100 is safe, 50–79 is caution, 20–49 is suspicious, and 0–19 is dangerous. Teams often auto-allow safe, require human review for caution/suspicious, and block dangerous.

How does brin compute this skill score?

brin evaluates four dimensions: identity (source trust), behavior (runtime patterns), content (malicious instructions), and graph (relationship risk). Analysis runs in tiers: static signals, deterministic pattern checks, then AI semantic analysis when needed.

What do identity, behavior, content, and graph mean for this skill?

Identity checks source trust, behavior checks unusual runtime patterns, content checks for malicious instructions, and graph checks risky relationships to other entities. Looking at sub-scores helps you understand why an entity passed or failed.

Why does brin scan packages, repos, skills, MCP servers, pages, and commits?

brin performs risk assessments on external context before it reaches an AI agent. It scores that context for threats like prompt injection, hijacking, credential harvesting, and supply chain attacks, so teams can decide whether to block, review, or proceed safely.

Can I rely on a safe verdict as a full security guarantee?

No. A safe verdict means no significant risk signals were detected in this scan. It is not a formal guarantee; assessments are automated and point-in-time, so combine scores with your own controls and periodic re-checks.

When should I re-check before using an entity?

Re-check before high-impact actions such as installs, upgrades, connecting MCP servers, executing remote code, or granting secrets. Use the API in CI or runtime gates so decisions are based on the latest scan.

Learn more in threat detection docs, how scoring works, and the API overview.

Last Scanned

March 1, 2026

Verdict Scale

safe80–100
caution50–79
suspicious20–49
dangerous0–19

Disclaimer

Assessments are automated and may contain errors. Findings are risk indicators, not confirmed threats. This is a point-in-time assessment; security posture can change.

start scoring agent dependencies.

integrate brin in minutes — one GET request is all it takes. query the api, browse the registry, or download the full dataset.