app.vercel.proof-stack-lake/proofstack
REMOTE · PROOF-STACK-LAKE.VERCEL.APP · SCANNED SEP 25
Audited indie product business cases with source-backed pricing, revenue and pricing benchmarks.
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 Security63
- 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 3 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 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 Usability81
- AI-judged instruction clarity (excellent).Pass
- Tool/resource definitions use about 315 tokens (~105/item across 3 items; 3 tools + 0 resources), lean.Pass
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management73
- Stability observed for 22 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
Capabilities20
- Spec-recency check failed: implements MCP spec 2024-11-05; the latest is 2026-07-28. See how to fix → Fail
How do I install the app.vercel.proof-stack-lake/proofstack MCP server?
app.vercel.proof-stack-lake/proofstack is a hosted endpoint at https://proof-stack-lake.vercel.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 · proof-stack-lake.vercel.app
claude mcp add --transport http app-vercel-proof-stack-lake-proofstack 'https://proof-stack-lake.vercel.app/mcp'
{
"mcpServers": {
"app-vercel-proof-stack-lake-proofstack": {
"url": "https://proof-stack-lake.vercel.app/mcp"
}
}
} {
"servers": {
"app-vercel-proof-stack-lake-proofstack": {
"type": "http",
"url": "https://proof-stack-lake.vercel.app/mcp"
}
}
} [mcp_servers.app-vercel-proof-stack-lake-proofstack] url = "https://proof-stack-lake.vercel.app/mcp"
{
"$schema": "https://opencode.ai/config.json",
"mcp": {
"app-vercel-proof-stack-lake-proofstack": {
"type": "remote",
"url": "https://proof-stack-lake.vercel.app/mcp",
"enabled": true
}
}
} openclaw mcp add app-vercel-proof-stack-lake-proofstack --url 'https://proof-stack-lake.vercel.app/mcp' --transport streamable-http
mcp_servers:
app-vercel-proof-stack-lake-proofstack:
url: "https://proof-stack-lake.vercel.app/mcp" {
"McpServers": {
"app-vercel-proof-stack-lake-proofstack": {
"Transport": "http",
"Url": "https://proof-stack-lake.vercel.app/mcp"
}
}
} assistant mcp add app-vercel-proof-stack-lake-proofstack -t streamable-http -u 'https://proof-stack-lake.vercel.app/mcp'
{
"mcpServers": {
"app-vercel-proof-stack-lake-proofstack": {
"type": "http",
"url": "https://proof-stack-lake.vercel.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.
- 25 Sept 26 +1
- We updated how we score, so this day's move reflects our rubric, not a change to the server See what changed → functional
- 23 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.
- 20 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 53 to 57. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 16 days of observed history at the previous scan, 17 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 47 to 50. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 14 days of observed history at the previous scan, 15 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 16 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 40 to 43. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 12 days of observed history at the previous scan, 13 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 14 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 33 to 37. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 10 days of observed history at the previous scan, 11 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 12 Sept 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.
- 10 Sept 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.
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 25 Sept 2026 · Probed https://proof-stack-lake.vercel.app/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=*.vercel.app | CN=WR1,O=Google Trust Services,C=US | 29 Aug 2026 | 27 Nov 2026 | RSA 2048 | SHA256-RSA | f7911168ffa7d0f4135e24792e7a52a8 |
| SANs: *.vercel.app | ||||||
| CN=WR1,O=Google Trust Services,C=US (CA) | CN=GTS Root R1,O=Google Trust Services LLC,C=US | 13 Dec 2023 | 20 Feb 2029 | RSA 2048 | SHA256-RSA | 7fd9e2c2d2048a0474b627a26d0868a7 |
| CN=GTS Root R1,O=Google Trust Services LLC,C=US (CA) | CN=GlobalSign Root CA,OU=Root CA,O=GlobalSign nv-sa,C=BE | 19 Jun 2020 | 28 Jan 2028 | RSA 4096 | SHA256-RSA | 77bd0d6cdb36f91aea210fc4f058d30d |
Background: What to check on a remote MCP endpoint →
DNSSEC insecure
Validation of proof-stack-lake.vercel.app. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | trust_anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| app. | present | 23684 | 8 | Verified |
| vercel.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 |
|---|---|
| strict-transport-security | max-age=63072000; includeSubDomains; preload |
| content-security-policy | default-src 'self'; script-src 'self'; style-src 'self' 'unsafe-inline' https://fonts.googleapis.com; font-src 'self' https://fonts.gstatic.com data:; img-src 'self' data: https:; connect-src 'self'; object-src 'none'; base-uri 'self'; frame-ancestors 'none'; form-action 'self'; upgrade-insecure-requests |
| x-content-type-options | nosniff |
| x-frame-options | DENY |
| referrer-policy | strict-origin-when-cross-origin |
| permissions-policy | camera=(), microphone=(), geolocation=(), payment=() |
Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →
Transports 2 probes
| Transport | URL | Outcome | Status | Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| streamable-http | https://proof-stack-lake.vercel.app/mcp | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://proof-stack-lake.vercel.app/mcp | HTTPS enforced | 308 | https://proof-stack-lake.vercel.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 →
get_case ~70
Fetch one audited case by slug: pricing tiers as published, the paid trigger, what to copy, what NOT to copy, and every evidence source with its URL and grade.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | string | yes | The case slug, e.g. 'tally-forms' (find slugs via search_cases). |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
pricing_benchmarks ~91
Pricing statistics counted from the published pricing pages of audited cases: median first paid tier, free-tier prevalence, and which capabilities most often sit behind the paywall. Products without a public price are excluded rather than estimated; no ranking or traffic figures exist here because those cannot be verified freely.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| category | string | – | Optional category, e.g. 'Micro SaaS'. Omit for the whole library. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
search_cases ~108
Search ProofStack's audited business-model case studies of small software products. Every case carries revenue and pricing claims linked to public sources with an evidence grade, plus an explicit list of what does NOT transfer to other builders.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| category | string | – | Optional exact category filter, e.g. 'Micro SaaS', 'Developer Tools', 'AI Tools'. |
| query | string | yes | Keywords: a product name, category, or business question (e.g. 'form builder', 'open source analytics'). |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
What is the app.vercel.proof-stack-lake/proofstack MCP server?
app.vercel.proof-stack-lake/proofstack is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as app.vercel.proof-stack-lake/proofstack. Audited indie product business cases with source-backed pricing, revenue and pricing benchmarks. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://proof-stack-lake.vercel.app/mcp).
Is the app.vercel.proof-stack-lake/proofstack MCP server safe to use?
app.vercel.proof-stack-lake/proofstack 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 app.vercel.proof-stack-lake/proofstack MCP server expose?
app.vercel.proof-stack-lake/proofstack exposes 3 tools: search_cases, get_case, pricing_benchmarks. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 269 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the app.vercel.proof-stack-lake/proofstack MCP server require authentication?
No. We connected to app.vercel.proof-stack-lake/proofstack without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.
Is the app.vercel.proof-stack-lake/proofstack MCP server still maintained?
app.vercel.proof-stack-lake/proofstack is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 25 September 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.