PHI Guard MCP

Scans source code for PHI leaking into LLM prompts, logs, and analytics calls - local-first, no network calls.

Documentation

phi-guard-mcp

A local-first MCP server that catches PHI (protected health information) flowing into LLM prompts, log statements, and analytics calls — in your source code, before it ships.

It runs entirely on your machine over stdio. No code, no snippets, and no detected values are ever sent anywhere.

Why

The risky moment in a healthcare codebase is rarely the database. It's the line where a patient record gets interpolated into a prompt, a console.log, or an analytics event. Those lines look harmless in review and never show up in infrastructure scanning, because nothing is misconfigured — the code is just doing what it says.

Tools

`redact_suggest`

Takes a raw text snippet — a log line, a prompt, an error message — detects PHI-shaped values, and returns a redacted version alongside what it found.

Input

{ "text": "Patient John Doe (MRN-12345), DOB: 01/01/1980" }

Output

{
  "original": "Patient John Doe (MRN-12345), DOB: 01/01/1980",
  "redacted": "Patient [NAME] ([MRN]), [DOB]",
  "detected": [
    { "type": "mrn",  "value": "MRN-12345",       "confidence": 0.9  },
    { "type": "dob",  "value": "DOB: 01/01/1980", "confidence": 0.85 },
    { "type": "name", "value": "John Doe",        "confidence": 0.8  }
  ]
}

Patterns and their confidence scores:

Type	Confidence	Matches
`ssn`	0.95	`123-45-6789`
`mrn`	0.90	`MRN-12345`, `MRN: 12345`
`dob`	0.85	`DOB: 01/01/1980`, `born 3/14/75`
`name`	0.80	`Patient John Doe` (captures `John Doe`)
`phone`	0.75	`555-867-5309`, `(555) 867 5309`
`email`	0.70	`jane.roe@example.com`

The patterns start deliberately narrow. A false positive that trains someone to ignore the tool is worse than a missed match.

`scan_code`

Walks a directory and flags lines where a sensitive-looking identifier (patient, diagnosis, dob, ssn, mrn, birthdate, medicalrecord) appears on the same line as a risky sink (openai, anthropic, bedrock, console.log/error/warn, logger., winston, pino, .track(, and capture( / captureException( / captureMessage().

Whole-line // and # comments are skipped, so a file that discusses PHI handling in prose doesn't trip the scanner on its own documentation.

Given the operative lines of test/fixtures/leaky-example.ts:

const prompt = await openai.responses.create({ input: `Patient: ${patient.name}, diagnosis: ${patient.diagnosis}` });
console.log("Sending patient prompt to LLM:", prompt);

Input

{ "path": "/abs/path/to/repo/test/fixtures" }

Output — excerpt. The full fixtures directory returns 8 findings, because it also holds the positive fixtures described under Tested against.

[
  {
    "file": "test/fixtures/leaky-example.ts",
    "line": 7,
    "severity": "high",
    "issue": "Sensitive-looking identifier passed to a risky sink (LLM call, logger, or analytics)",
    "snippet": "const prompt = await openai.responses.create({ input: `Patient: ${patient.name}, diagnosis: ${patient.diagnosis}` });"
  },
  {
    "file": "test/fixtures/leaky-example.ts",
    "line": 8,
    "severity": "high",
    "issue": "Sensitive-looking identifier passed to a risky sink (LLM call, logger, or analytics)",
    "snippet": "console.log(\"Sending patient prompt to LLM:\", prompt);"
  }
]

Scans .ts, .js, .tsx, .jsx, .py, .go. Skips node_modules, dist, build, coverage, out, .next, .turbo, and dotfiles.

Both conditions must hold on the same line. That is what keeps it quiet: on this repo's own source — which is dense with the words patient, diagnosis, mrn, and ssn inside its pattern definitions — it reports zero findings.

Tested against

6 out of 6 real leak patterns detected, across 5 different sinks (OpenAI, Anthropic, Sentry, Winston, PostHog/analytics) and 2 languages (TypeScript, Python) — including snake_case identifiers (patient_name, patient_diagnosis), which a naive word-boundary regex misses and which is the dominant naming convention in Python and Go.

0 false positives across 5 clean-code fixtures, including code that discusses PHI policy in comments and prose without ever leaking it, and code that legitimately handles patient records without sending them anywhere risky.

1 documented limitation: detection is line-based, so a sensitive value assigned on one line and used in a risky call several lines later isn't currently caught. This is a known scope boundary, not a bug — see What this is NOT below.

Full test fixtures live in test/fixtures/ if you want to verify any of this yourself rather than take it on faith:

npm test

The suite asserts both directions: every file under positive/ must produce at least one finding, and negative/ must produce exactly zero. A miss on either side fails the run.

What this is NOT

Not a hosted service. It is a local stdio process. There is no backend, no account, and no telemetry. Your code never leaves your machine.
Not a HIPAA certification, audit, or compliance attestation. Passing a scan_code run proves nothing to a regulator. It is a linter for a specific class of mistake, not evidence of compliance. Treat a clean result as "these particular patterns didn't fire", never as "this codebase is HIPAA-safe".
Not a competitor to Prowler, AWS Config, or cloud posture tools. Those scan infrastructure and configuration. This reads source code and finds a different class of problem. They are complementary; this replaces neither.
Not exhaustive. Regex-based detection has a real false-negative rate. It will not catch PHI in a variable it can't name-match, or values arriving from an external call.
Not able to follow a value across lines. The identifier and the sink have to appear on the same line. Assigning patient.diagnosis to a local variable and logging that variable three lines later produces no finding — there is a worked example in test/fixtures/known-limitations/. Real dataflow analysis is out of scope for v1; this is a deliberate boundary, and the fixture exists so the gap stays visible rather than forgotten.
Not fully comment-aware. Only whole-line // and # comments are skipped. Block comments (/* ... */) and trailing end-of-line comments are still scanned, so a sink keyword sitting inside one of those can produce a finding even though nothing executes.

Setup

Requires Node.js 18+.

git clone https://github.com/Abidit/phi-guard-mcp.git
cd phi-guard-mcp
npm install
npm run build

dist/ is gitignored, so npm run build is required after cloning — the MCP config below points at the compiled output.

Claude Code

Add .mcp.json to your project root, using the absolute path to your clone:

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "phi-guard": {
      "command": "node",
      "args": ["/absolute/path/to/phi-guard-mcp/dist/index.js"]
    }
  }
}

Restart Claude Code, or run /mcp and reconnect phi-guard. A rebuild alone will not reach an already-running stdio process.

Verifying

npm test          # fixture suite: positive, negative, known limitations
npm run typecheck # src/ and test/ under strict mode
npx tsx test/smoke.ts

Or drive it through the official Inspector without a browser:

npx @modelcontextprotocol/inspector --cli node dist/index.js --method tools/list
npx @modelcontextprotocol/inspector --cli node dist/index.js \
  --method tools/call --tool-name redact_suggest \
  --tool-arg text="Patient John Doe (MRN-12345)"

The server declares only the tools capability, so resources/list and prompts/list correctly return -32601 Method not found. The Inspector UI probes all three regardless and shows those two in red — expected, not a fault.

License

MIT — see LICENSE.