MCP Audit Tool Feedback (Model Context Protocol)

I carried out an MCP-AUDIT using MCP Inspector, an MCP-compliant tool designed to analyze how model context is structured, passed, and enforced across interactions. The audit focused on context integrity, boundary enforcement, instruction hierarchy, and how data flows between system, developer, and user layers.

Overall, MCP Inspector performed well in mapping and validating context layers. It clearly separated system instructions, developer constraints, and user inputs, which made it easier to spot where context overrides or conflicts could occur. The context flow visualization was especially useful for understanding how instructions propagate through the model lifecycle and for identifying potential context leakage or priority misalignment.

The tool was also effective in detecting context persistence issues, such as stale memory usage and improper carry-over of previous session data. This is important in security- and privacy-sensitive environments, and the audit showed that context boundaries were mostly respected. However, MCP Inspector did flag some cases where user input could subtly influence higher-priority instructions, suggesting that stricter context isolation may be needed.

One limitation I noticed was that while MCP Inspector identified issues accurately, the remediation guidance was fairly high-level. It explained what the problem was but did not always give clear, practical steps on how to fix it, which could be challenging for less experienced users. In addition, performance slowed down when auditing large or deeply nested contexts.

Overall, MCP Inspector proved to be a reliable and useful MCP audit tool for checking model behavior, context handling, and instruction hierarchy compliance. It is particularly valuable for AI governance, security reviews, and alignment checks. With more detailed remediation guidance and better performance optimization for large contexts, it would be even more effective in real-world deployments.