PageCritic
REMOTE · PAGECRITIC.APP
Audit a landing page's conversion (score, top issues, fixes) and check if AI crawlers can read it.
Available components
Last scanned (12 hours ago)
Scores higher than 61% of remote servers
Reachable. Last reached 22 Oct 2026.
Category Marketing and SEO
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 Security74
- 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
- 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 Usability65
- AI-judged instruction clarity (excellent).Pass
- Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 745 tokens (~248/item across 3 items; 3 tools + 0 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 Management10
- Stability observed for 3 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
Tool Safety100
- No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
- We read all 3 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 4 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
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.
- 22 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.
- 21 Oct 26 0
- Tool “audit_landing_page” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- Schema quality: 219 → 248 ▼ functional
- “audit_landing_page” added an optional parameter “language” cosmetic
- 20 Oct 26 0
- Stability: unverified → 0.03 ▲ functional
- 19 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 22 Oct 2026 · Probed https://pagecritic.app/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=pagecritic.app | CN=YE1,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US | 18 Oct 2026 | 16 Jan 2027 | ECDSA 256 | ECDSA-SHA384 | 57727d058943f56ab99fa4042323e32d1e3 |
| SANs: *.pagecritic.app, pagecritic.app | ||||||
| CN=YE1,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US (CA) | CN=Root YE,O=ISRG,C=US | 3 Sept 2025 | 2 Sept 2028 | ECDSA 384 | ECDSA-SHA384 | 5ddd70dd31f801c85c186a7a04b80afe |
| CN=Root YE,O=ISRG,C=US (CA) | CN=ISRG Root X2,O=Internet Security Research Group,C=US | 13 May 2026 | 2 Sept 2032 | ECDSA 384 | ECDSA-SHA384 | 872165fc34b6e5fba8add5b3705fb53a |
| CN=ISRG Root X2,O=Internet Security Research Group,C=US (CA) | CN=ISRG Root X1,O=Internet Security Research Group,C=US | 13 May 2026 | 2 Sept 2032 | ECDSA 384 | SHA256-RSA | 6c8f1dc727c7117f7baf853ac980f9cd |
Background: What to check on a remote MCP endpoint →
DNSSEC insecure
Validation of pagecritic.app. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | trust_anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| app. | present | 23684 | 8 | Verified |
| pagecritic.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 |
| Header | Value |
|---|---|
| x-content-type-options | nosniff |
Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →
Transports 2 probes
| Transport | URL | Outcome | Status | Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| streamable-http | https://pagecritic.app/mcp | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://pagecritic.app/mcp | HTTPS enforced | 308 | https://pagecritic.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 →
audit_landing_page Audit a landing page for conversions ~416
Loads a public landing page in a real browser (desktop and mobile), and returns a conversion score from 0 to 100, seven sub-scores (clarity, value proposition, CTA, trust, design, mobile, SEO basics), the top 3 issues with concrete fixes, what already works, a short AI-readiness score, and fix_prompt: a Markdown prompt that hands the fixes to a coding agent such as Claude Code or Cursor. Use it when someone wants feedback on why a homepage, landing page or pricing page does not convert, wants a second opinion before a launch, or wants to compare their page with a competitor's. Do not use it for pages behind a login, for non-HTML files, or for general SEO keyword research. It takes 30 to 90 seconds; if it returns status "running", call get_audit_result with the audit_id. The free result is complete on its own. The full report (10-15 more ranked issues, 3 headline and 3 CTA rewrites, 5 quick wins, mobile review, full AI-readiness fixes) costs $19 USD one-time, paid by a human at report_url. Set language to "pt" for a report in Brazilian Portuguese. A URL audited through the API in the last 24 hours (in the same language) returns that same result. Limit: 5 new audits per hour per client, 20 with an API key. With an API key that has credits (Authorization: Bearer header; 10 full reports for $49, see https://pagecritic.app/developers), the result includes the full report.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| language | string | – | Language of the report: "en" (English, default) or "pt" (Brazilian Portuguese). Headline and CTA rewrites stay in the page's own language. Prices stay in USD. |
| url | string | yes | Full URL of the public web page, e.g. https://example.com or https://example.com/pricing. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
check_ai_readiness Check if AI crawlers and agents can read a page ~207
Fetches a public page as a normal browser and as GPTBot, OAI-SearchBot, ChatGPT-User, ClaudeBot, Claude-User and PerplexityBot, then reports which AI bots are blocked or get a challenge page, the robots.txt rule for each AI bot, how much text is visible without JavaScript, JSON-LD types, sitemap, Markdown versions and llms.txt, with a 0-100 score and prioritized fixes. Use it when someone asks whether ChatGPT, Claude or Perplexity can see or cite their site, or why their site does not show up in AI answers. Do not use it to judge design or copy (use audit_landing_page). It uses plain HTTP fetches, takes about 5-15 seconds, and is free (15 checks per hour per client).
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | string | yes | Full URL of the public web page, e.g. https://example.com or https://example.com/pricing. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_audit_result Get an audit result by id ~80
Returns the current result of an audit started with audit_landing_page, by its audit_id. Use it only when audit_landing_page returned status "running"; wait about 20 seconds between calls. Returns the same fields as audit_landing_page.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| audit_id | string | yes | The 24-character audit_id returned by audit_landing_page. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the PageCritic MCP server?
PageCritic is a hosted endpoint at https://pagecritic.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 · pagecritic.app
claude mcp add --transport http app-pagecritic-pagecritic 'https://pagecritic.app/mcp'
What is the PageCritic MCP server?
PageCritic is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as app.pagecritic/pagecritic. Audit a landing page's conversion (score, top issues, fixes) and check if AI crawlers can read it. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://pagecritic.app/mcp).
Is the PageCritic MCP server safe to use?
PageCritic scores 71 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 PageCritic MCP server expose?
PageCritic exposes 3 tools: audit_landing_page, check_ai_readiness, get_audit_result. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 703 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the PageCritic MCP server require authentication?
No. We connected to PageCritic without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.
Is the PageCritic MCP server still maintained?
PageCritic is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 22 October 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.