Integration suite for Zscaler AI Guard policy scanning across multiple AI development platforms (Anthropic Claude, Cursor, Cline, Windsurf, GitHub Actions, Jenkins, OpenAI, AWS, Google Cloud). Provides hooks and scripts for content scanning in both directions (IN/OUT) to detect and block policy violations.
This is not an MCP server, it is a collection of integration hooks and scripts for third-party IDEs (Cline, Windsurf, Cursor) and CI/CD systems (GitHub Actions, Jenkins). The 6 'tools' are not MCP tool definitions but rather hook entry points and utility functions. None have formal JSON Schema input definitions visible in the source. Descriptions are present but generic. No output schemas documented. The repository provides policy-scanning integrations for Zscaler AI Guard, not a remotely-callable MCP server. Scoring reflects that tool definitions are inferred from hook signatures rather than explicit MCP registration.
Cline hook that scans tool output (direction OUT) after tool execution. Blocks if policy violation detected.
Cline hook that scans tool requests (direction IN) before tool execution. Blocks execution if policy violation detected.
Windsurf hook that audits MCP tool results (direction OUT) after execution. Cannot block but logs detections.
Windsurf hook that scans MCP tool requests (direction IN) before execution. Exits with code 2 on BLOCK.
Scans content against Zscaler AI Guard policies in specified direction (IN for requests, OUT for responses)
GitHub Actions and Jenkins script that scans prompts from YAML config against AI Guard policies
Not an MCP server. Repository contains IDE hooks and CI/CD scripts, not a remotely-accessible MCP server with tool definitions.
No formal JSON Schema input definitions visible. Tool schemas inferred from hook signatures; no explicit schema registration or validation.
No output schemas documented. Callers cannot predict return structure or plan downstream tool chains.
Hook names do not follow verb_noun convention. 'PreToolUse' and 'PostToolUse' are lifecycle hooks, not action tools. Naming is ambiguous for LLM tool selection.
No error handling guidance. Descriptions do not explain what happens on policy violation, how to recover, or what the LLM should do next.
Inferred effective spec: <=2025-11-25.
| Scored | Grade | Overall | Spec posture | Rubric |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-09-23 | F | 37 | <=2025-11-25 | v2 |