Verifier MCP server

• changes_sinceFree

  What changed in the tool economy since a date: verdict flips, deaths, revivals, new servers, confirmed drift — the census diff as data. Poll this weekly to keep a local view current without re-crawling.

• check_serverFree

  The FULL evidence behind the verdict for ONE server, by exact registry name — call should_i_use first for the one-word decision; call this when you want the whole record. Leads with the verdict (allow/warn/block), then the `rating` grouped as REACH (answers, latency vs population, protocol, auth), USE (tool count vs population, capability breadth, harness readiness) and TRUST (costume-farm?, duplicate inventory?, verifiability grade, drift / rug-pull, and where checkable whether its ANSWERS are true vs a public primary), a cluster tag, a distinctiveness score, and an explicit not_claimed block. Argument: name.

• find_toolsFree

  Find and RANK the trustworthy tool for a NEED. Describe the task in plain words ('screen a company for sanctions', 'US tariff data', 'vessel tracking') — the search is full-text over tool names AND their stored descriptions (stemmed, BM25-ranked), so your words need not appear in any tool's name. Servers come best-rated first, and EACH ROW carries its verdict (allow/warn/block), cluster, distinctiveness and the matching tool names, so you can pick without a second call. Alive, non-costume, current-protocol servers rank on top; dead / costume-farm / walled ones sink. Argument: need.

• list_findingsFree

  The observatory's ruled findings — each with its claim and its falsification test — plus the public corrections log (what we published, then corrected, never deleted). Call this to cite what has been established, or to see where we were wrong. No arguments.

• registry_pulseFree

  Call this FIRST for the state of the MCP tool ecosystem in one shot: how many servers exist, how many actually answer a real handshake, how many are behind a login, the largest costume-farm concentration, AND the Tier-2 truth summary (how many server answers were re-derived against a public primary source and matched). Every number is re-derivable; grades observed/reported/derived. No arguments.

• report_callFree

  AFTER your agent calls a tool, fire-and-forget how it went — success/failure, latency, cost — so the observatory accumulates realized reliability (the one thing outside-in probing can't see: did it actually work for a real call). Anchored against our own probe: a 'worked' report on a server we saw dead is discarded. Does NOT change the current rating yet (probing stays load-bearing) — this is accumulate-ahead-of-demand. Args: server (required), tool, ok, latency_ms, cost_tokens, call_hash (a hash binding the report to a real call).

• resolve_server_nameFree

  Resolve a partial or misspelled server name to its EXACT registry id before calling should_i_use / check_server. Matches a fragment against registry NAMES only (not capabilities — for 'which tool does X' use find_tools). Returns candidate exact names with each one's latest liveness outcome. Empty query rejected.

• should_i_useFree

  THE GATE — call this before your agent depends on a tool you don't already trust. Give an exact server registry name and get a one-word verdict — allow / warn / block — with the reason, plus the full rating underneath. 'block' = dead/unreachable/costume-farm-shaped, don't depend on it; 'warn' = usable but look first; 'allow' = safe to depend on. If you have a NEED not a name, use find_tools; if you have a fuzzy name, use resolve_server_name. Argument: name, e.g. 'com.trimtabist/us-tariff-ledger'.

• –Code scanremote-only server, no package to scann/a
• Live reliabilityremote reachable in 697ms20/20
• Tool poisoning8 tool descriptions checked15/15
• Auth qualityopen endpoint, read-only tools10/15
• Maintenanceno repository listed3/15
• Maintainer identityendpoint served from the registry-verified namespace domain8/10

Safety score

75/100

higher than 45% of 48,255 servers

Tools

8

the typical server has 7

Tools that change things

0%

typical: 0%. Fewer write tools means less an agent can break

Uptime

100%

of our recent checks; the typical remote server answers 100%

Response time

156 ms

faster than 72% of 30,031 servers

Grade history

• 2026-11-03restoreC → Bscore 75: No source repository listed

Verifier: common questions

Is Verifier MCP server safe?

Mostly: it is graded B (75/100). Read the Verifier safety report

How do I install Verifier?

It runs remotely at robinsaige.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 Verifier need an API key?

Not as far as the registry entry and our scan can tell: no credentials are declared or required.

Is Verifier maintained?

The latest release is v0.1.0.

Is Verifier up?

100% of our last 28 checks got an answer. We check remote servers about four times a day.

How does Verifier compare with other MCP servers?

safety score 75/100 (higher than 45% of 48,255 servers); tools 8 (the typical server has 7); tools that change things 0% (typical: 0%. Fewer write tools means less an agent can break). Full comparison.