Hunch
REMOTE · HUNCHSHEET.APP · 3 COMPONENTS
Calibrated judgments for text: yes/no probabilities, picks from your options, or scores.
Available components
Last scanned (7 hours ago)
Scores higher than 35% of remote servers
Reachable. Last reached 7 Nov 2026.
Category AI and Machine Learning
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 Security97
- The endpoint's TLS certificate is valid, in date, and uses a strong key. View diagnostics → Pass
- The endpoint enforces authorisation, advertised via RFC 9728 protected-resource metadata. View diagnostics → Pass
- 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
- The authorisation server supports Client ID Metadata Documents, the current MCP client-registration mechanism. View diagnostics → Pass
Transport & Reachability0
- Transport blocked by authentication: the endpoint requires auth we don't have to verify streamable-http. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Unverified
Schema Quality & AI Usability0
- Schema blocked by authentication: the endpoint requires auth we don't have to read it. See how to fix → Unverified
Stability & Change Management0
- Stability not yet verified: not enough scan history yet (needs a 30-day window).Unverified
Tool Coverage0
- Tool coverage blocked by authentication: the endpoint requires auth we don't have to read its tools.Unverified
Tool Safety0
- Tool safety blocked by authentication: the endpoint requires auth we don't have to read its tools.Unverified
Capabilities0
- Capabilities blocked by authentication: the endpoint requires auth we don't have to read them. See how to fix → Unverified
Unverified: 6 categories
Categories scored 0 because we could not verify them: authentication we do not have, an unreachable endpoint, or not enough scan history. We only credit what we can confirm. Claim this server and supply a read-only token to verify it and lift the score.
Checks we ran (5)
- TLS certificate
- Authorization
- HTTPS
- HSTS header
- DNSSEC
Checks we could not complete (6)
These are gaps on our side, not findings about this hosted endpoint. We only credit what we can confirm, so a category made up entirely of them scores 0.
- Transport in Transport & Reachability (scores 0 for this)Transport blocked by authentication: the endpoint requires auth we don't have to verify streamable-http.
- Schema quality in Schema Quality & AI Usability (scores 0 for this)Schema blocked by authentication: the endpoint requires auth we don't have to read it.
- Stability in Stability & Change Management (scores 0 for this)Stability not yet verified: not enough scan history yet (needs a 30-day window).
- Tool coverage in Tool Coverage (scores 0 for this)Tool coverage blocked by authentication: the endpoint requires auth we don't have to read its tools.
- Tool safety in Tool Safety (scores 0 for this)Tool safety blocked by authentication: the endpoint requires auth we don't have to read its tools.
- Capabilities in Capabilities (scores 0 for this)Capabilities blocked by authentication: the endpoint requires auth we don't have to read them.
Does not apply to this hosted endpoint (2)
- Supply Chain SecurityScored on package channels only. This is a hosted endpoint, so there is nothing to install or inspect.
- Provenance & TransparencyScored on package channels only. This is a hosted endpoint, so there is nothing to install or inspect.
The score does not measure everything. What the score does not measure →
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.
- 6 Nov 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
- 29 Sept 26 0
- Endpoint reachability: reachable → behind authorisation ▼ security
- Tool safety: pass → unverified ▼ security
- Transport: pass → unverified ▼ security
- Authorization: partial → pass ▲ security
- First check of Authorization: pass security
- Tool coverage: 100 → unverified ▼ functional
- Capabilities: pass → unverified ▼ functional
- First check of Schema quality: unverified functional
- 28 Sept 26 0
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 7 Nov 2026 · Probed https://hunchsheet.app/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=*.hunchsheet.app | CN=YR1,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US | 25 Oct 2026 | 23 Jan 2027 | RSA 2048 | SHA256-RSA | 6d5e749223eb8f5fa2890c10b36794a132c |
| SANs: *.hunchsheet.app, hunchsheet.app | ||||||
| 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 hunchsheet.app. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | Trust anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| app. | DS published | 23684 | 8 | Verified |
| hunchsheet.app. | No DS | Unsigned (proven) parent-signed NSEC/NSEC3 proves an unsigned delegation |
Authentication Enforced and verified
The endpoint asked for a token and published valid RFC 9728 metadata describing how to get one.
| Result | Enforced and verified |
|---|---|
| Enforced | On connection |
| HTTP status | 401 |
WWW-Authenticate challenge Bearer resource_metadata="https://hunchsheet.app/.well-known/oauth-protected-resource"
Bearer resource_metadata="https://hunchsheet.app/.well-known/oauth-protected-resource"| Header | Value |
|---|---|
| strict-transport-security | max-age=63072000 |
| x-content-type-options | nosniff |
| referrer-policy | strict-origin-when-cross-origin |
| www-authenticate | Bearer resource_metadata="https://hunchsheet.app/.well-known/oauth-protected-resource" |
Protected resource metadata
| Document | https://hunchsheet.app/.well-known/oauth-protected-resource |
|---|---|
| Retrieved | Yes |
| Resource | https://hunchsheet.app/mcp |
| Authorisation server | https://hunchsheet.app |
Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →
Transports 2 probes
| Transport | URL | Outcome | Status | Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| streamable-http | https://hunchsheet.app/mcp | Auth required | 401 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://hunchsheet.app/mcp | HTTPS enforced | 308 | https://hunchsheet.app/mcp |
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 →
hunch_ask Hunch: yes/no probability ~246
Judge a batch of short texts against one yes/no question and get back a calibrated probability (0 to 1) per text, not generated prose. Use it to score, tag, filter or triage many leads, support tickets, reviews, survey answers or emails at once, for example "Is this lead a decision maker?" or "Is this email urgent?". Costs 1 credit per answered text (blank texts and texts repeated elsewhere in the same call are free; answers are cached 6 hours). Limits: the model reads the text only, no math, counting or dates; English works best; put the full definition of what counts as yes inside the question, since the model sees nothing else.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| question | string | yes | A yes/no question, e.g. "Is this lead a decision maker who can approve a purchase without asking someone else?". Put the full definition of yes/no in the question text. |
| texts | array | yes | Short texts to judge (leads, tickets, reviews, survey answers, emails, ...), one answer per text. Blank entries and texts repeated elsewhere in the same call cost nothing. Chunked internally into cal… |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| charged | integer | yes | Credits spent on this call. |
| credits | integer | yes | Credits left on the key after this call. |
| results | array | yes | – |
No examples provided.
hunch_balance Hunch: check credits ~56
Check how many Hunch credits are left on this key and how many have been used so far. Read-only, costs nothing. Call it before a large batch, or when a judging tool reports texts were skipped for lack of credits.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| credits | integer | yes | Credits left on the key. |
| used | integer | yes | Credits used on this key so far, lifetime. |
No examples provided.
hunch_multi Hunch: several yes/no questions at once ~225
Ask up to 10 yes/no questions about the same batch of texts in one call, one probability per question per text, not generated prose. Use it when several judgments read the same text at once, for example "Can they buy?", "Are they angry?", "Is it urgent?" on the same support ticket, for a fraction of the tokens of separate calls. Costs 1 credit per answered question per text (blanks and duplicate texts are free). Limits: the model reads the text only, no math, counting or dates, English works best, and each question needs its own definition of yes inside it.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| questions | array | yes | Up to 10 yes/no questions, each answered once per text, e.g. ["Can they buy?", "Are they angry?", "Is it urgent?"]. |
| texts | array | yes | Short texts to judge (leads, tickets, reviews, survey answers, emails, ...), one answer per text. Blank entries and texts repeated elsewhere in the same call cost nothing. Chunked internally into cal… |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| charged | integer | yes | – |
| credits | integer | yes | – |
| results | array | yes | – |
No examples provided.
hunch_pick Hunch: pick one option ~273
Sort a batch of short texts into one of your own categories and get back the chosen option plus how confident the model is, not generated prose. Use it to route support tickets, classify feedback, or tag leads by type, for example options ["billing: invoices and charges", "refund", "bug", "other"]. Costs 1 credit per answered text (blanks and duplicates in the same call are free). Limits: 2 to 255 options, each "label" or "label: description" to disambiguate a short label; the model reads the text only, no math, counting or dates, English works best.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| options | array | yes | The options to choose from, 2 to 255 of them. Each is "label" or "label: description" when the label alone is ambiguous, e.g. "billing: invoices and charges". |
| question | string | – | Optional. What is being decided, e.g. "Which category does this ticket belong to?". Defaults to "Which option best describes this text?". |
| texts | array | yes | Short texts to judge (leads, tickets, reviews, survey answers, emails, ...), one answer per text. Blank entries and texts repeated elsewhere in the same call cost nothing. Chunked internally into cal… |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| charged | integer | yes | – |
| credits | integer | yes | – |
| results | array | yes | – |
No examples provided.
hunch_score Hunch: score on a scale ~265
Place a batch of short texts on your own ordered scale (2 to 10 levels, low to high) and get back a probability-weighted position, the most likely level, and confidence, not generated prose. Use it for sentiment ("angry|disappointed|neutral|happy|delighted"), fit scoring ("no fit|weak|good|perfect"), or any low-to-high rating. Costs 1 credit per answered text (blanks and duplicates in the same call are free). Limits: the model reads the text only, no math, counting or dates, English works best, and the question should say what is being scored.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| levels | array | yes | The scale, low to high, 2 to 10 levels, e.g. ["angry", "disappointed", "neutral", "happy", "delighted"]. Each may be "label: description". |
| question | string | yes | What is being scored, e.g. "How does the reviewer feel about the product overall?". |
| texts | array | yes | Short texts to judge (leads, tickets, reviews, survey answers, emails, ...), one answer per text. Blank entries and texts repeated elsewhere in the same call cost nothing. Chunked internally into cal… |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| charged | integer | yes | – |
| credits | integer | yes | – |
| results | array | yes | – |
No examples provided.
How do I install the Hunch MCP server?
Hunch is a hosted endpoint at https://hunchsheet.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 · hunchsheet.app
claude mcp add --transport http app-hunchsheet-hunch 'https://hunchsheet.app/mcp'
What is the Hunch MCP server?
Hunch is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as app.hunchsheet/hunch. Calibrated judgments for text: yes/no probabilities, picks from your options, or scores. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://hunchsheet.app/mcp).
Is the Hunch MCP server safe to use?
Hunch scores 39 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 Hunch MCP server expose?
Hunch exposes 5 tools: hunch_ask, hunch_pick, hunch_score, hunch_multi, hunch_balance. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 1,065 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the Hunch MCP server require authentication?
Yes. Hunch asked us for credentials when we connected, so you will need to authorise it in your MCP client before it can do anything.
Is the Hunch MCP server still maintained?
Hunch is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 7 November 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.
What did VerifyMCP test on the Hunch MCP server?
VerifyMCP ran 5 checks on Hunch, covering TLS certificate, Authorization, HTTPS, HSTS header and 1 more. 6 items could not be completed, a gap on our side rather than a finding about Hunch: Transport, Schema quality, Stability, Tool coverage and 2 more. 6 categories score 0 for that reason, because we only credit what we can confirm. Supply Chain Security and Provenance & Transparency do not apply to a hosted endpoint, so they were not tested. The score does not measure everything, and the scoring documentation lists what it leaves out.