MCP.Market

Zerodust MCP server

not responding
by andresdefi·io.github.andresdefi/zerodust·v0.5.1·2 stars

Recover stranded native gas: empty a chain's balance to exactly zero on 25 EVM chains.

C64/100grade C
What users say
No reviews yet
Be the first
Safety scan
C64/100

full report

Adoption
Growing

2 stars369 downloads/wk

Reviews

Write one

Nobody has reviewed Zerodust yet.

If you have run it, two minutes of your experience saves the next person an afternoon.

Zerodust tools

Tool list not cached yet. `describe` through the gateway fetches it live.

Public scan report

scanner v0.1.10 · 2026-10-14 · same rubric, same numbers if you re-run it

1 high
  • Code scan7 source files scanned25/25
  • Live reliabilityremote unreachable: Streamable HTTP error: Error POSTing to endpoint: {"message":"Route POST:/mcp not found","error":"Not Found","statusCode":404}0/20
  • –Tool poisoningtools not inspected (endpoint requires auth); not countedn/a
  • Auth qualitystatic API keys via environment variables6/15
  • Maintenancelast push 0 days ago15/15
  • Maintainer identityregistry namespace matches repository owner; GitHub account older than a year8/10

Findings (1)

  • highRemote endpoint did not respondreliability.unreachable

    Streamable HTTP error: Error POSTing to endpoint: {"message":"Route POST:/mcp not found","error":"Not Found","statusCode":404}

Overall 64/100. Components that don't apply are left out of the denominator. Any critical finding is an F.RubricAppeal a findingJSON

How Zerodust compares

Against every graded MCP server, from our own scans and uptime checks. Updated after each scan run.

Safety score
64/100
higher than 19% of 48,255 servers
Uptime
0%
of our recent checks; the typical remote server answers 100%
Response time
246 ms
faster than 56% of 30,031 servers
GitHub stars
2
more than 75% of 28,688 servers
Downloads a week
369
more than 84% of 12,191 servers with a package

Release history: 4 versions in the registry since 2026-07-25, latest 2026-10-01, typically one every 3 days.

Install Zerodust in Claude Code, Cursor or VS Code

claude mcp add --transport http zerodust https://api.zerodust.xyz/mcp
Add to Cursor

What the publisher says

From the Zerodust repository's README, as published. We do not edit it. Read it on GitHub

ZeroDust

Exit a blockchain completely - transfer 100% of your native gas balance via EIP-7702

ZeroDust is an intent-based exit system that enables users to sweep their entire native gas token balance to exactly zero via EIP-7702 sponsored execution.

For AI agents

Agents accumulate dust as a byproduct of existing. Anything doing multi-chain work — arbitrage, bridging, testing, deployment — ends up with stranded gas on chains it will never touch again. A human notices and shrugs; an unattended agent leaks capital indefinitely.

Look first, no install, no key

The hosted MCP server needs nothing installed. Point any MCP client at:

https://api.zerodust.xyz/mcp

That is enough to find out whether an address has anything stranded and what recovering it would cost. It is read-only, because it holds no keys.

Then sweep, with the key wherever you keep it

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "zerodust": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["@zerodust/mcp-server"],
      "env": {
        "ZERODUST_ALLOW_EXECUTE": "true",
        "ZERODUST_SIGNER_MODULE": "./my-signer.mjs"
      }
    }
  }
}

Read-only by default. Sweeping needs the explicit opt-in above plus a signing key, and there are four ways to supply one so a raw key never has to sit in a config file:

Funds can only go to the agent's own address unless ZERODUSTALLOWEDDESTINATIONS says otherwise — so a prompt-injected agent still cannot send funds somewhere you never approved.

Try it without risking anything

Every sweep tool and every SDK sweep accepts dryRun. It fetches a real quote, produces all three real signatures, and stops before submitting. Nothing is broadcast and no balance moves:

"Do a dry run of sweeping my Arbitrum balance to Base"

There is deliberately no testnet mode: the API serves no testnet chains, so a testnet flag would only return empty chain lists and failing quotes. dryRun gives the same confidence against production.

Agents can provision their own credentials

The read-only tools work with no credential at all. For higher limits an agent can issue itself a key with no human in the loop, via the zerodustregisterapi_key tool or directly:

curl -X POST https://api.zerodust.xyz/agent/register \
  -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '{"name": "my-agent", "agentId": "my-agent-1"}'
# -> { "apiKey": "zd_...", "rateLimits": { "perMinute": 300, "daily": 1000 } }

Verified on mainnet (2026-07-21): Optimism → Base, source balance to exactly 0, delegation auto-revoked, 99.88% delivered, 23.2s end to end — 0x19456ea8….

Note on wallets: the browser UI needs the non-standard

wallet_signAuthorization RPC, which no shipping wallet exposes yet

(MetaMask #7836,

Rabby #3411). Agents are

unaffected — they hold their own keys and sign locally.

The Problem

Shortened. The full README is on GitHub.

Nothing above is checked by us. What we check is on the safety report.

Grade history

  • 2026-10-14downgradeA → Cscore 64: Remote endpoint did not respond

Zerodust: common questions

Is Zerodust MCP server safe?
With care: it is graded C, so read the findings first (64/100). Read the Zerodust safety report
How do I install Zerodust?
It runs remotely at api.zerodust.xyz. Add it to Claude Code, Cursor, VS Code or Claude Desktop with the snippets above, or call it through the mcp.market gateway without installing anything.
Does Zerodust need an API key?
Yes. The registry entry asks for ZERODUST_API_KEY, ZERODUST_KEYSTORE_PASSWORD, ZERODUST_PRIVATE_KEY.
Is Zerodust maintained?
The last commit was 21 days ago (2026-10-14). The latest release is v0.5.1.
Is Zerodust up?
0% of our last 28 checks got an answer. We check remote servers about four times a day.
How does Zerodust compare with other MCP servers?
safety score 64/100 (higher than 19% of 48,255 servers); uptime 0% (of our recent checks; the typical remote server answers 100%); response time 246 ms (faster than 56% of 30,031 servers). Full comparison.