Plith Rigor
REMOTE · PLITH.AI
Structured multi-step workflows that produce production-quality deliverables. Plan any task free.
Available components
Last scanned (23 hours ago)
Scores higher than 64% of remote servers
Reachable. Last reached 4 Nov 2026.
Category Workflow Automation
How this component scores in each security and reliability category. Every signal is checked automatically against the live server, and we only credit what we can confirm. How we score → Why this is hard to score →
Endpoint Security80
- The endpoint's TLS certificate is valid, in date, and uses a strong key. View diagnostics → Pass
- No authorisation is required to call this server. Every tool declares its destructiveHint and none is destructive, so open access doesn't expose one. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Partial
- HTTPS is enforced; there's no plaintext access path. View diagnostics → Pass
- The HSTS (Strict-Transport-Security) header is present. View diagnostics → Pass
- DNSSEC check failed: this domain isn't protected by DNSSEC. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
Transport & Reachability100
- Verified streamable-http transport via a live MCP handshake. View diagnostics → Pass
Schema Quality & AI Usability75
- 100% of prompts and resources have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the item's name).Pass
- AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
- Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 1358 tokens (~226/item across 6 items; 4 tools + 2 resources), over budget; trim descriptions and params. See how to fix → Fail
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management33
- Stability observed for 10 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
Tool Coverage100
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 100% of tool parameters carry a description.Pass
- Structured output schemas are declared (100% of tools); any adoption earns full credit.Pass
Tool Safety100
- No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
- All 1 tool(s) whose name or description implies an irreversible operation declare an MCP destructiveHint annotation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 5 captured unit(s) of tool text and found none that tries to manipulate the model reading it.Pass
Capabilities20
- Spec-recency check failed: implements MCP spec 2024-11-05; the latest is 2026-07-28. See how to fix → Fail
Every change we have recorded for this component, newest first. Security-relevant changes are always shown. ▲ marks a change for the better, ▼ a change for the worse; unmarked changes are neutral.
- 3 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 27 to 30. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 8 days of observed history at the previous scan, 9 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 1 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 20 to 23. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 6 days of observed history at the previous scan, 7 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 30 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 13 to 17. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 4 days of observed history at the previous scan, 5 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 28 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 7 to 10. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 2 days of observed history at the previous scan, 3 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 26 Oct 26 +1
- Stability: unverified → 0.03 ▲ functional
- 25 Oct 26 70
First indexed and scored.
Diagnostic detail from the automated scan of this channel: what the scanner observed at each step, so you can see exactly where a check passed or failed. It is informational only and never changes the trust score.
Captured 4 Nov 2026 · Probed https://plith.ai/api/mcp/rigor
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=plith.ai | CN=YR1,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US | 14 Oct 2026 | 12 Jan 2027 | RSA 2048 | SHA256-RSA | 6cf967a16061eb02f4acd6fd686f232ea91 |
| SANs: plith.ai | ||||||
| CN=YR1,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US (CA) | CN=Root YR,O=ISRG,C=US | 3 Sept 2025 | 2 Sept 2028 | RSA 2048 | SHA256-RSA | a20253f15f2691c05dc1ce13b9bcca4e |
| CN=Root YR,O=ISRG,C=US (CA) | CN=ISRG Root X1,O=Internet Security Research Group,C=US | 13 May 2026 | 2 Sept 2032 | RSA 4096 | SHA256-RSA | f24b6d17f9d9ad7cb1c9fea78782699f |
Background: What to check on a remote MCP endpoint →
DNSSEC insecure
Validation of plith.ai. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | trust_anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| ai. | present | 1814, 3799 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| plith.ai. | absent | Unsigned (proven) parent-signed NSEC/NSEC3 proves an unsigned delegation |
Authentication No authorisation required
The endpoint answered without asking for a token. Anyone who knows the URL can reach it.
| Result | No authorisation required |
|---|---|
| HTTP status | 200 |
| Header | Value |
|---|---|
| strict-transport-security | max-age=63072000; includeSubDomains; preload |
| content-security-policy | default-src 'self'; script-src 'self' 'unsafe-inline' 'wasm-unsafe-eval' https://umami.peaklight.news; style-src 'self' 'unsafe-inline'; img-src 'self' data: https:; font-src 'self' data:; connect-src 'self' https://*.supabase.co wss://*.supabase.co https://api.stripe.com https://umami.peaklight.news; frame-ancestors 'none'; form-action 'self'; base-uri 'self' |
| x-content-type-options | nosniff |
| x-frame-options | DENY |
| referrer-policy | strict-origin-when-cross-origin |
| permissions-policy | camera=(), microphone=(), geolocation=() |
Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →
Transports 2 probes
| Transport | URL | Outcome | Status | Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| streamable-http | https://plith.ai/api/mcp/rigor | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://plith.ai/api/mcp/rigor | HTTPS enforced | 308 | https://plith.ai/api/mcp/rigor |
The tools this component advertises to a client, with an estimated token cost for each. Expand a tool to see its parameters and schema. The per-tool counts are indicative and are not scored directly; the schema's total context footprint is one signal in Schema Quality & AI Usability. A tool's description is untrusted text the model reads on every call, which is what makes this list a security surface and not just an inventory: how tool poisoning works →
rigor_execute ~482
Execute a structured workflow end-to-end. Call rigor_plan first (free) to preview the step sequence and cost estimate before committing credits. Classifies the task, selects the optimal tool sequence, and executes each step with the right LLM model. Returns a complete deliverable — solution designs, competitive analyses, governance documents, and more. Supports SSE streaming for real-time progress, webhook callback, or polling. For atomic work — classification, scoring, ranking, entity extraction, query parsing — set preferences.execution to 'direct' and declare preferences.output_contract to get validated JSON records from a single call, routed to the cheapest model that holds the schema.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| context | object | – | Additional context for the workflow. |
| context_fields | array | – | Optional, with prior_workflow_id: the fields to carry over. Pass ["full_step_results"] for every step output in full. |
| delivery | object | – | Delivery method. Default: polling (MCP clients typically can't handle SSE). |
| preferences | object | – | Optional workflow preferences. |
| prior_workflow_id | string | – | Optional: the workflow_id (wr_…) of a finished workflow in your workspace to build on. Its results are passed to this run as context. It is charged as a new run at the normal quote. |
| task_description | string | yes | Natural language description of the task, at most 4,000 characters. Be specific — include what you want produced, constraints, and context. Example: 'Design a caching layer for our API gateway with R… |
| task_type | string | – | Optional hint to bypass automatic classification. Passing it also removes the slowest classification tiers from the critical path, so send it whenever you know the shape. Multi-step deliverable types… |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| available_modes | array | – | – |
| delivery_mode | string | – | – |
| estimated_credits | number | – | – |
| execution | string | – | Present with value 'direct' when direct execution ran. Absent for standard multi-call execution. |
| execution_fallback | boolean | – | True when you explicitly requested direct execution and it could not be honoured — the workflow ran as standard multi-call instead. Never set for an auto-selected attempt, since you did not ask. |
| ok | boolean | – | – |
| poll_url | string | – | – |
| status | string | – | – |
| task_type | string | – | – |
| value_class | string | – | – |
| workflow_id | string | – | – |
No examples provided.
rigor_plan ~379
Before executing a complex task, get a structured workflow plan with per-step cost estimates. Classifies your task, selects the optimal framework sequence, and returns the full plan without executing anything. The response's allowed_modes tells you whether this plan is eligible for direct execution. Free — no credits charged.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| context_fields | array | – | Optional, with prior_workflow_id: the fields to carry over. Pass ["full_step_results"] for every step output in full. |
| preferences | object | – | Optional workflow preferences. |
| prior_workflow_id | string | – | Optional: the workflow_id (wr_…) of a finished workflow in your workspace to build on. Its results are passed to this run as context. It is charged as a new run at the normal quote. |
| task_description | string | yes | Natural language description of the task, at most 4,000 characters. Be specific — include what you want produced, constraints, and context. Example: 'Design a caching layer for our API gateway with R… |
| task_type | string | – | Optional hint to bypass automatic classification. Passing it also removes the slowest classification tiers from the critical path, so send it whenever you know the shape. Multi-step deliverable types… |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| generated_title | string | – | – |
| ok | boolean | – | – |
| plan | object | – | – |
No examples provided.
rigor_status ~66
Check the status of a running or completed Rigor workflow. Returns progress, step results, and the full deliverable when complete. Use after rigor_execute with polling delivery to retrieve results.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| workflow_id | string | yes | The workflow ID returned by rigor_execute (format: wr_xxx). |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| ok | boolean | – | – |
| workflow | object | – | – |
No examples provided.
rigor_workflows ~364
List and search Rigor workflows for your organization, with filtering and pagination. Returns status, progress, capacity usage, and available actions per workflow. Use to monitor workflow state, understand concurrent limit usage, identify stuck or completed workflows, and — via q — find prior work on a subject before commissioning it again. Pair a q hit with rigor_status to read that workflow's deliverable.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| counts_toward_limit | string | – | Filter to workflows counting toward the concurrent limit |
| created_after | string | – | ISO timestamp — only workflows created after this time |
| created_before | string | – | ISO timestamp — only workflows created before this time |
| cursor | string | – | Pagination cursor (created_at timestamp from previous page) |
| folder_id | string | – | Filter by folder ID. Pass "unassigned" for workflows in no folder |
| limit | number | – | Page size (default 20, max 100) |
| q | string | – | Search the workflow title and task description. Every whitespace-separated term must appear in one or the other, as a case-insensitive substring — so "vector search postgres" matches a task described… |
| status | string | – | Filter by status (comma-separated). Valid values: executing, step_executing, completed, failed, halted, pending_approval, cancelled. E.g. "halted,failed,pending_approval" |
| task_type | string | – | Filter by classified task type |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| concurrent_summary | object | – | – |
| credits_remaining | number | – | – |
| ok | boolean | – | – |
| pagination | object | – | – |
| workflows | array | – | – |
No examples provided.
How do I install the Plith Rigor MCP server?
Plith Rigor is a hosted endpoint at https://plith.ai/api/mcp/rigor, so there is nothing to install locally. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.
remote · plith.ai
claude mcp add --transport http ai-plith-rigor 'https://plith.ai/api/mcp/rigor'
What is the Plith Rigor MCP server?
Plith Rigor is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as ai.plith/rigor. Structured multi-step workflows that produce production-quality deliverables. Plan any task free. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://plith.ai/api/mcp/rigor).
Is the Plith Rigor MCP server safe to use?
Plith Rigor scores 75 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. That is a record of what we were able to check automatically, not an endorsement. The category breakdown on this page shows every signal behind the number, including the ones we could not confirm.
What tools does the Plith Rigor MCP server expose?
Plith Rigor exposes 4 tools: rigor_plan, rigor_execute, rigor_status, rigor_workflows. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 1,291 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the Plith Rigor MCP server require authentication?
No. We connected to Plith Rigor without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.
Is the Plith Rigor MCP server still maintained?
Plith Rigor is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 4 November 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.