MCP.Market

Ebanx MCP server

by codespar·io.github.codespar/mcp-ebanx·v0.2.2·271 stars

MCP server for EBANX — cross-border payments, payouts, exchange rates

B82/100grade B
What users say
No reviews yet
Be the first
Safety scan
B82/100

full report

Adoption
Growing

271 stars

Reviews

Write one

Nobody has reviewed Ebanx yet.

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

Ebanx tools (18, 7 write)

write = sends, deletes, buys or posts

Read from the package source without running it. The installed server may list more.

  • cancel_paymentwrite action

    Cancel/void a pending payment by hash (e.g. unpaid boleto, authorized card).

  • capture_payment

    Capture a previously authorized credit card payment (full or partial).

  • create_card_tokenwrite action

    Tokenize a credit/debit card for reuse without re-collecting card data.

  • create_mass_payoutwrite action

    Create a mass payout — multiple payouts in a single batch request.

  • create_paymentwrite action

    Create a payment in EBANX (boleto, credit card, PIX, etc.)

  • create_payoutwrite action

    Create a payout to a bank account

  • delete_card_tokenwrite action

    Delete a previously stored card token.

  • exchange_rate

    Get current exchange rate for a currency pair

  • get_banks

    List available banks for a country

  • get_payment

    Get payment details by hash

  • get_payout

    Query a payout by external_reference or payout id.

  • list_payment_methods

    List available payment methods for a country (which payment_type_codes are supported).

  • list_payments

    List payments by date range

  • query_payment_by_merchant_code

    Get payment details by merchant_payment_code (alternative to hash)

  • refundwrite action

    Refund a payment (full or partial)

  • simulate_payment

    Simulate the response of a payment in sandbox without persisting it (useful for integration testing).

  • validate_document

    Validate a LATAM tax document (CPF/CNPJ for BR, RFC for MX, DNI for AR/PE) using checksum/format rules. Local validation, no API call.

  • verify_notification

    Verify an EBANX webhook notification HMAC signature against the integration key. Local verification, no API call.

Public scan report

scanner v0.1.9 · 2026-09-26 · same rubric, same numbers if you re-run it

no findings
  • Code scan5 source files scanned25/25
  • –Live reliabilityno gateway calls yet and no remote to proben/a
  • –Tool poisoningtools not inspected (local package is not executed); not countedn/a
  • Auth qualitystatic API keys via environment variables6/15
  • Maintenancelast push 29 days ago15/15
  • Maintainer identityregistry namespace matches repository owner7/10
Overall 82/100. Components that don't apply are left out of the denominator. Any critical finding is an F.RubricAppeal a findingJSON

How Ebanx compares

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

Safety score
82/100
higher than 63% of 48,255 servers
Tools
18
the typical server has 7
Tools that change things
39%
typical: 0%. Fewer write tools means less an agent can break
GitHub stars
271
more than 95% of 28,688 servers

What its tools let an agent do: 11 read · 4 create · 1 change · 2 delete

Install Ebanx in Claude Code, Cursor or VS Code

Runs npx -y @codespar/mcp-ebanx on your machine. Read the scan report first; the gateway never runs local packages.

claude mcp add mcp-ebanx -- npx -y @codespar/mcp-ebanx
Add to Cursor

What the publisher says

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

MCP Dev LATAM 🌎 Every commerce API your AI agent needs to run a business in Latin America. Brazil 🇧🇷 · Mexico 🇲🇽 · Argentina 🇦🇷 · Colombia 🇨🇴 · Chile 🇨🇱 · Peru 🇵🇪 · plus 4 agentic payment protocols. MCP servers for LATAM commerce · live in the official MCP Registry · MIT License Machine-readable catalog: codespar.dev/api/servers Catalog · Quick Start · Agentic Protocols · All Servers · Contribute

The Problem

AI agents can write code, analyze data, and chat. But they can't operate a business — collect payments, issue invoices, ship products, or notify customers. Especially not in Latin America, where every service has its own API, auth pattern, and quirks (mTLS for BACEN Pix v2, JWT-RSA for STP-SPEI, AFIP web services, contract-gated developer portals, and on).

Meanwhile, four agentic payment protocols are shipping in parallel — checkout protocols (Stripe ACP, Google UCP), authorization layers (AP2), and micropayment rails (x402) — and none of them compose cleanly with each other or with the regional rails businesses actually run on.

MCP Dev LATAM bridges both gaps. Traditional LATAM services + the new agentic payment protocols, all accessible through a single MCP interface.

The Solution

Each MCP server in this repo wraps a real provider — payments, fiscal, logistics, messaging, banking, ERP, identity, fraud, crypto, and the agentic protocols — so your agent can operate a complete business workflow.

🛒 Customer places order
  → 💳 Agent charges via Pix (Asaas / Mercado Pago / Zoop)
  → 📄 Agent issues NFe (Nuvem Fiscal / Focus NFe / NFe.io)
  → 📦 Agent generates shipping label (Melhor Envio / Skydropx)
  → 📱 Agent sends tracking via WhatsApp (Z-API / WhatsApp Cloud)
  → 📊 Agent records in ERP (Omie / Bling / Tiny)
  → 🏦 Agent reconciles balance (Stark Bank / Itaú / BTG)

Six systems. Zero human intervention. One agent.

Agentic Payment Protocols

Four servers for the emerging agentic payment stack:

Shortened. The full README is on GitHub.

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

Ebanx: common questions

Is Ebanx MCP server safe?
Mostly: it is graded B (82/100). Read the Ebanx safety report
How do I install Ebanx?
It runs on your machine. Copy the Claude Code, Cursor, VS Code or Claude Desktop config from the install section.
Does Ebanx need an API key?
Yes. The registry entry asks for EBANX_API_KEY.
Is Ebanx maintained?
The last commit was 67 days ago (2026-08-29). The latest release is v0.2.2.
How does Ebanx compare with other MCP servers?
safety score 82/100 (higher than 63% of 48,255 servers); tools 18 (the typical server has 7); tools that change things 39% (typical: 0%. Fewer write tools means less an agent can break). Full comparison.

More from codespar →