MCP.Market

Web Resource Ledger MCP server

online · 100% uptime
by benpeter·io.github.benpeter/web-resource-ledger·v1.0.0·2 stars

Capture web pages as cryptographically signed, tamper-evident evidence with WACZ archives.

A87/100grade A
What users say
No reviews yet
Be the first
Safety scan
A87/100

full report

Adoption
Growing

2 stars

Reviews

Write one

Nobody has reviewed Web Resource Ledger yet.

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

Web Resource Ledger tools

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

Public scan report

scanner v0.1.10 · 2026-10-25 · same rubric, same numbers if you re-run it

no findings
  • –Code scanremote-only server, no package to scann/a
  • Live reliabilityremote reachable in 382ms (auth required)20/20
  • –Tool poisoningtools not inspected (endpoint requires auth); not countedn/a
  • Auth qualityauth enforced (bearer)9/15
  • Maintenancelast push 1 days ago15/15
  • Maintainer identityregistry namespace matches repository owner; GitHub account older than a year8/10
Overall 87/100. Components that don't apply are left out of the denominator. Any critical finding is an F.RubricAppeal a findingJSON

How Web Resource Ledger compares

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

Safety score
87/100
higher than 73% of 48,255 servers
Uptime
100%
of our recent checks; the typical remote server answers 100%
Response time
472 ms
faster than 31% of 30,031 servers
GitHub stars
2
more than 75% of 28,688 servers

Install Web Resource Ledger in Claude Code, Cursor or VS Code

claude mcp add --transport http web-resource-ledger https://api.webresourceledger.com/mcp
Add to Cursor

What the publisher says

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

Web Resource Ledger (WRL)

Cryptographic evidence of web content -- capture what a page looked like, when, with proof anyone can verify.

Submit a URL, get back a screenshot, rendered HTML, HTTP headers, and an Ed25519-signed WACZ bundle. The verification URL works for anyone -- no account needed. Deploy on your own infrastructure; your captures, your keys, your evidence.

WRL was built almost entirely by an LLM (Claude) with a human directing the work. Every phase -- from MVP to production -- is documented in docs/evolution/. The prompts, agent debates, decisions, and outcomes are all public.

For comprehensive guides on authentication, verification, batch captures, and MCP integration, see docs.webresourceledger.com.

Status: Production service, single-operator deployment. All three roadmap acts are complete. The API is pre-1.0 but functional, deployed, and serving real traffic.

What you get

A single API call produces:

the banner presence and the underlying page content are preserved

  • Dual screenshots (PNG) -- before and after cookie consent dismissal, so both
  • Rendered HTML -- the DOM after JavaScript execution
  • HTTP response headers -- the server's response at capture time
  • Signed WACZ bundle -- all artifacts packaged, hashed, and signed with Ed25519
  • Verification URL -- a shareable link anyone can use to confirm authenticity
  • FRE 902(13) certification PDF -- GET /v1/captures/{captureId}/certificate returns a signed PDF describing the capture process and integrity evidence, designed to support a Rule 902(13) self-authentication foundation

Content Security

WRL screens every submitted URL against threat intelligence databases before capture begins:

  • URLs identified as threats (malware, phishing, etc.) are rejected at submission time with a 422 response.
  • Existing captures are re-scanned daily. Captures that fail re-screening are quarantined: metadata remains accessible, artifact downloads return 451.
  • Screening degrades gracefully -- if the threat intelligence service is unavailable, captures proceed normally. The threatCheck field on a capture record reflects the outcome: pass, fail, or unavailable.

Configure the service via GOOGLEWEBRISKAPIKEY in your environment (see step 8b below). The key is optional; omitting it disables screening and all captures report threatCheck: unavailable.

Usage

Requires a running WRL instance. See Setup below.

export WRL_API_KEY=your_tenant_api_key

Tenant keys are created via the admin API (see step 8a). For deployments using the legacy static key, WRLAPIKEY is your CAPTUREAPIKEY value.

The examples below use api.webresourceledger.com. Replace with localhost:8787 for local dev or your own deployment URL if self-hosting.

Step 1: Submit a capture

curl -X POST https://api.webresourceledger.com/v1/captures \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer $WRL_API_KEY" \
  -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '{"url": "https://example.com"}'
{
  "id": "cap_a1b2c3d4e5f6a7b8c9d0e1f2a3b4c5d6",
  "statusUrl": "https://api.webresourceledger.com/v1/captures/cap_a1b2c3d4e5f6a7b8c9d0e1f2a3b4c5d6/status",
  "note": "Use GET /v1/captures to list and search your captures."
}

Shortened. The full README is on GitHub.

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

Web Resource Ledger: common questions

Is Web Resource Ledger MCP server safe?
Yes, by our scan: it is graded A (87/100). Read the Web Resource Ledger safety report
How do I install Web Resource Ledger?
It runs remotely at api.webresourceledger.com. 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 Web Resource Ledger need an API key?
Yes. The registry entry asks for Authorization.
Is Web Resource Ledger maintained?
The last commit was 11 days ago (2026-10-24). The latest release is v1.0.0.
Is Web Resource Ledger up?
100% of our last 28 checks got an answer. We check remote servers about four times a day.
What can I use instead of Web Resource Ledger?
Servers from other publishers that do the same job: Front-End Checklist MCP server and Tradememory Protocol MCP server.
How does Web Resource Ledger compare with other MCP servers?
safety score 87/100 (higher than 73% of 48,255 servers); uptime 100% (of our recent checks; the typical remote server answers 100%); response time 472 ms (faster than 31% of 30,031 servers). Full comparison.

Alternatives to Web Resource Ledger

Same job from other publishers: the closest match first, then the best rated.

  • Front-End Checklist
    Review frontend code and live pages against 386 quality-gated web development rules.
    A
  • Tradememory Protocol
    Tamper-evident decision audit trail and outcome-weighted memory for AI trading agents.
    B