StructForge
REMOTE · STRUCTFORGE.ASKQA.APP · SCANNED SEP 27
Turn messy text into strict JSON schemas agents can trust (invoice, receipt, contact, resume).
Available components
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 Security46
- The endpoint's TLS certificate is valid, in date, and uses a strong key. View diagnostics → Pass
- Authorisation not fully verified: no authorisation is required to call this server, and 6 tool(s) never declared a destructiveHint. The MCP spec treats an absent hint as destructive by default, so we cannot call this surface safe. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Unverified
- HTTPS enforcement could not be verified: the plaintext port answered with HTTP 400, which proves neither a plaintext path nor enforcement. View diagnostics → Unverified
- HSTS check failed: the Strict-Transport-Security header is absent. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
- 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 Usability70
- AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
- Tool/resource definitions use about 261 tokens (~43/item across 6 items; 6 tools + 0 resources), lean.Pass
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management97
- Stability observed for 29 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
Tool Coverage93
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 78% of tool parameters carry a description.Partial
Tool Safety100
- No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
- We read all 6 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 6 captured unit(s) of tool text and found none that tries to manipulate the model reading it.Pass
Capabilities100
- Implements a supported MCP spec version (2025-11-25); the latest is 2026-07-28.Pass
How do I install the StructForge MCP server?
StructForge is a hosted endpoint at https://structforge.askqa.app/mcp, 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 · structforge.askqa.app
claude mcp add --transport http app-askqa-structforge 'https://structforge.askqa.app/mcp'
{
"mcpServers": {
"app-askqa-structforge": {
"url": "https://structforge.askqa.app/mcp"
}
}
} {
"servers": {
"app-askqa-structforge": {
"type": "http",
"url": "https://structforge.askqa.app/mcp"
}
}
} [mcp_servers.app-askqa-structforge] url = "https://structforge.askqa.app/mcp"
{
"$schema": "https://opencode.ai/config.json",
"mcp": {
"app-askqa-structforge": {
"type": "remote",
"url": "https://structforge.askqa.app/mcp",
"enabled": true
}
}
} openclaw mcp add app-askqa-structforge --url 'https://structforge.askqa.app/mcp' --transport streamable-http
mcp_servers:
app-askqa-structforge:
url: "https://structforge.askqa.app/mcp" {
"McpServers": {
"app-askqa-structforge": {
"Transport": "http",
"Url": "https://structforge.askqa.app/mcp"
}
}
} assistant mcp add app-askqa-structforge -t streamable-http -u 'https://structforge.askqa.app/mcp'
{
"mcpServers": {
"app-askqa-structforge": {
"type": "http",
"url": "https://structforge.askqa.app/mcp"
}
}
} The mcpServers block is a cross-client convention. Remote transports vary, so check your client's docs.
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.
- 27 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 93 to 97. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 28 days of observed history at the previous scan, 29 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 25 Sept 26 0
- We updated how we score, so this day's move reflects our rubric, not a change to the server See what changed → functional
- 24 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 83 to 87. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 25 days of observed history at the previous scan, 26 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 22 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 77 to 80. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 23 days of observed history at the previous scan, 24 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 20 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 70 to 73. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 21 days of observed history at the previous scan, 22 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 18 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 63 to 67. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 19 days of observed history at the previous scan, 20 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 16 Sept 26 −5
- Stability: pass → 0.60 functional
- 29 Aug 26 72
- Injection markers: unverified → pass ▲ security
- Stability: unverified → pass ▲ security
- Transport: fail → pass ▲ security
- First check of Judged manipulation: pass security
- Authorization: Authorisation not fully verified: no authorisation is required to call this server, and 6 tool(s) never declared a destructiveHint. The MCP spec treats an absent hint as destructive by default, so we cannot call this surface safe. security
- Endpoint reachability: not serving MCP → reachable ▲ functional
- Tool coverage: unverified → 100 ▲ functional
- MCP protocol: unverified → pass ▲ functional
- First check of Destructive annotations: pass functional
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 27 Sept 2026 · Probed https://structforge.askqa.app/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=askqa.app | CN=WE1,O=Google Trust Services,C=US | 10 Sept 2026 | 9 Dec 2026 | ECDSA 256 | ECDSA-SHA256 | 45d7bba521c4bce513f211e64c27285f |
| SANs: askqa.app, structforge.askqa.app, *.structforge.askqa.app | ||||||
| CN=WE1,O=Google Trust Services,C=US (CA) | CN=GTS Root R4,O=Google Trust Services LLC,C=US | 13 Dec 2023 | 20 Feb 2029 | ECDSA 256 | ECDSA-SHA384 | 7ff31977972c224a76155d13b6d685e3 |
| CN=GTS Root R4,O=Google Trust Services LLC,C=US (CA) | CN=GlobalSign Root CA,OU=Root CA,O=GlobalSign nv-sa,C=BE | 15 Nov 2023 | 28 Jan 2028 | ECDSA 384 | SHA256-RSA | 7fe530bf331343bedd821610493d8a1b |
Background: What to check on a remote MCP endpoint →
DNSSEC insecure
Validation of structforge.askqa.app. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | trust_anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| app. | present | 23684 | 8 | Verified |
| askqa.app. | 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 |
Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →
Transports 2 probes
| Transport | URL | Outcome | Status | Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| streamable-http | https://structforge.askqa.app/mcp | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://structforge.askqa.app/mcp | Inconclusive | 400 |
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 →
extract_table ~28
Extract HTML or markdown tables into JSON rows.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| html | string | yes | HTML or table content |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_schema ~40
Discover schema shapes. Pass name for one schema, or omit to list all curated schemas.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | string | – | Schema name; omit to list all |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
normalize_data ~45
Normalize data object to a named schema (invoice, receipt, contact, resume).
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| data | object | yes | Input data object |
| target_schema | string | yes | Target schema name |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
parse_invoice ~38
Parse invoice text into vendor, amount, due_date, line_items (with math_check).
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| text | string | yes | Invoice text or PDF extract |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
structure_text ~67
Convert messy text to strict JSON schema. Use for emails, chat logs, unstructured input. Schemas: invoice, receipt, contact, resume.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| schema_name | string | – | Target schema: invoice, receipt, contact, resume |
| text | string | yes | Raw text to structure |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
validate_structure ~43
Validate JSON against a schema. Enforces field presence and types (string/number/date/array).
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| data | object | yes | – |
| schema_name | string | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
What is the StructForge MCP server?
StructForge is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as app.askqa/structforge. Turn messy text into strict JSON schemas agents can trust (invoice, receipt, contact, resume). This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://structforge.askqa.app/mcp).
Is the StructForge MCP server safe to use?
StructForge scores 72 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 StructForge MCP server expose?
StructForge exposes 6 tools: structure_text, parse_invoice, extract_table, normalize_data, validate_structure, get_schema. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 261 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the StructForge MCP server require authentication?
No. We connected to StructForge without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.
Is the StructForge MCP server still maintained?
StructForge is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 27 September 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.