For AppSec and DevSecOps teams reviewing agent systems

Turn an agent repository into a security decision your team can defend.

Helmwart reads supported agent configuration, traces what an agent can actually reach, and shows which control needs testing before release.

The guided evaluation starts with an application for one repository. You can also use Helmwart independently.

Repository reviewDecision needed

Can outside content reach private data and an outbound action through the same agent?

Outside contentAgentPrivate data + outbound action

A finding is useful when it leads to a change, a rescan, and a review record—not just a severity label.

The problem

Agent systems change faster than their threat models.

Security teams often reconstruct an agent's access from config files, diagrams, and interviews after the release is already waiting. An isolated alert cannot show whether the agent can actually connect the dangerous steps.

Helmwart starts with the configuration your team has. It connects agents, tools, memory, and data into reachable paths, then points to the boundary where an engineering change can be tested.

One configuration, one decision

Follow the evidence from file to release gate.

This example uses a public MCP configuration fixture in Helmwart's repository. It is a test system, not a customer scan. Nothing in it was executed.

01

Read the system

The file declares three MCP servers behind one host: puppeteer, postgres, and filesystem. Helmwart imports those declarations instead of asking a reviewer to redraw them.

Source: tests/fixtures/import/mcp-config/danger-mix.json

mcpServerspuppeteerpostgresfilesystem
02

Trace what is reachable

The scan ranks a route from a browser tool response through the MCP host agent to the database. The same host has outbound authority. That combination is why the route merits review; the tool names alone are not findings.

Ranked route · critical finding puppeteer MCP host agent postgres Outbound authority on the host agent
03

Choose a change to test

A reviewer can test a split that keeps browser responses away from an agent with private-store access. The change is a proposal until the team applies it and rescans every alternate route.

Control decision Separate untrusted retrieval from private-data authority. Then rescan; do not mark the path resolved on intent alone.
04

Record the release decision

Keep the source file, reachable path, proposed control, and follow-up result together. While a critical route remains open, the review can hold the release; a passing decision needs evidence from the changed system.

Current example stateHold for control and rescan No approval or risk reduction is claimed for this unmodified fixture.

Static configuration establishes declared reachability, not malicious intent or observed runtime behavior. A human reviewer owns the approval decision.

The product view

Inspect the path, not another isolated alert.

The canvas below shows a separate built-in MCP tool-server template. Its highlighted agent brings the route, trust zones, and finding context into one view; it is not a screenshot of the fixture above.

Helmwart canvas · MCP tool-server template2 trifecta findings
Select the screenshot to inspect it full size. This built-in template illustrates the review interface; the worked configuration above is a separate public test fixture.

Bring your system

Make the next agent review about a decision, not a reconstruction.

In the guided evaluation, your team brings one repository. Helmwart helps run the first scan, examine the leading path, and see whether the result is useful in your CI review. The program is optional and does not change self-service access.