Skip to content
verify mcp Beta VerifyMCP is currently in beta. If you notice any issues, get in touch and we’ll put it right.

io.github.CloudCorpRecords/claimscope

OCI · GHCR.IO/CLOUDCORPRECORDS/CLAIMSCOPE · 2 COMPONENTS

Compare engine answers, inspect disagreement and grade study evidence for questions.

38 Trust /100

Last scanned (11 hours ago)

Scores higher than 38% of OCI servers

Trust breakdown (7 categories)

How this component scores in each security and reliability category. Every signal is checked automatically from public evidence about the published package, including repeated runs of it in an isolated sandbox, and we only credit what we can confirm. How we score → Why this is hard to score →

Supply Chain Security0
  • No malware scan is available for this kind of package: the supply-chain vendors we use do not cover it. This is a permanent gap in our coverage, not a finding about the package.Unverified
  • Known CVEs could not be checked: this artifact ships no SBOM or dependency manifest, so there is no dependency list to read.Unverified
  • Install-script risk not yet assessed.Unverified
  • Dependency health could not be checked: this artifact ships no SBOM or dependency manifest, so there is no dependency list to read.Unverified
Provenance & Transparency45
Schema Quality & AI Usability69
  • AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
  • Tool/resource definitions use about 833 tokens (~69/item across 12 items; 12 tools + 0 resources), lean.Pass
  • Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management3
  • Stability observed for 1 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 Safety75
  • No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
  • 0 of 1 tool(s) whose name or description implies an irreversible operation declare an MCP destructiveHint annotation; "ecca_pre_mortem" implies "execute" and declares no destructiveHint at all, which the MCP spec reads as destructive by default. See how to fix → Fail
  • An AI judge read all 12 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

Unverified: 1 category

A category scored 0 because we could not verify it: a data source with nothing on this package, evidence we could not reach, or a check we could not run. We only credit what we can confirm.

Changelog

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.

  • 5 Nov 26 0
    • Provenance: unverified → fail ▼ security
  • 4 Nov 26 38

    First indexed and scored.

Diagnostics

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 5 Nov 2026 · Analysed oci/ghcr.io/cloudcorprecords/claimscope@0.1.0

Provenance No attestation

The registry publishes no build provenance for this version, so there is nothing to verify.

Result No attestation
Ecosystem oci
Reason No attestation published

Background: How many MCP packages publish verified provenance →

MCP tools · 12 exposed · ~833 tokens

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 →

Tool Tokens
ecca_bts_divergence ~46

Measures lexical and semantic divergence across candidate assertions to penalize sycophancy.

NameTypeReqDescription
assertionsarrayyesArray of candidate assertions or claims to measure divergence for.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

ecca_claim_protocol_validate ~88

Check one ecca.claim-protocol 1.0 document for shape: versioned, engine slots only (no vendor names), split causes from the published taxonomy, question text only with consent, seal present. Returns ok with the error list; validates shape, never the record behind it.

NameTypeReqDescription
documentobjectyesThe protocol document to check (docs/CLAIM_PROTOCOL.md).

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

ecca_decision_tournament ~58

Evaluates multi-option decision matrix using minimax regret and Pareto ranking over candidate pathways.

NameTypeReqDescription
decisionContextstringyesContext of the decision to evaluate.
optionsarrayyesList of discrete options or strategic pathways.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

ecca_learning ~60

Learning and study skills: refine the question, fetch studies, and show named claims before the verdict. Applies evidence and claims checks; spends one solve.

NameTypeReqDescription
questionstringyesThe learning / study-skills question to research and give a verdict on.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

ecca_money ~57

Money and business: refine the question, fetch studies, and show named claims before the verdict. Applies evidence and claims checks; spends one solve.

NameTypeReqDescription
questionstringyesThe money / business question to research and give a verdict on.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

ecca_nutrition ~59

Nutrition and supplements: refine the question, fetch studies, and show named claims before the verdict. Applies evidence and claims checks; spends one solve.

NameTypeReqDescription
questionstringyesThe nutrition / supplements question to research and give a verdict on.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

ecca_pre_mortem ~68

Executes an adversarial pre-mortem identifying failure modes and early warning indicators using empirical argument verification.

NameTypeReqDescription
horizonMonthsinteger–Time horizon in months to simulate forward failure modes.
premisestringyesThe strategic plan, architecture, or business premise to stress-test.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

ecca_psychology ~56

Psychology research: refine the question, fetch studies, and show named claims before the verdict. Applies evidence and claims checks; spends one solve.

NameTypeReqDescription
questionstringyesThe psychology question to research and give a verdict on.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

ecca_refine ~57

Use one keyed tier-quota slot to sharpen rough student questions without adding facts; return detected niches and refinement chips. A closed engine ceiling falls back locally.

NameTypeReqDescription
textstringyesThe rough question or text to refine and sharpen.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

ecca_research ~76

Use one keyed tier-quota slot and dispatch-ceiling reservation to fetch and grade studies from scholarly indexes; return fetched evidence and explicit gaps.

NameTypeReqDescription
nichestring–Subject niche to focus the research on: psychology, learning, nutrition or money.
questionstringyesThe research question to fetch and grade studies for.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

ecca_synthesize ~147

Compare answers from configured engines and inspect disagreement, with lexical similarity and final-answer agreement when measurable.

NameTypeReqDescription
antagonistboolean–When true, forces one engine to act as adversarial red-team antagonist.
depthstring–intuitive and fast route to one engine; executive, pioneer and deep route a multi-engine dispatch (free callers: two engines first, expanding on measured divergence, one deep solve per day). Any othe…
modelstring–Label echoed in the result. Every value dispatches through the same registered engines; depth decides fast or multi-engine.
querystringyesThe core inquiry, hypothesis, or decision challenge to synthesize.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

ecca_verify ~61

Independently answer a question and compare the candidate against deterministic panel agreement. Show named dissent; spends one solve.

NameTypeReqDescription
candidate_answerstringyesThe candidate answer to verify against the panel.
questionstringyesThe question the candidate answer responds to.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

Install

How do I install the io.github.CloudCorpRecords/claimscope MCP server?

io.github.CloudCorpRecords/claimscope runs locally as a container image, launched with docker run --rm -i ghcr.io/cloudcorprecords/claimscope:0.1.0. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 3 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.

oci · ghcr.io/cloudcorprecords/claimscope

# add to Claude Code
claude mcp add cloudcorprecords-claimscope -- docker run --rm -i ghcr.io/cloudcorprecords/claimscope:0.1.0
Common questions

What is the io.github.CloudCorpRecords/claimscope MCP server?

io.github.CloudCorpRecords/claimscope is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.CloudCorpRecords/claimscope. Compare engine answers, inspect disagreement and grade study evidence for questions. This page covers its container image (ghcr.io/cloudcorprecords/claimscope).

Is the io.github.CloudCorpRecords/claimscope MCP server safe to use?

io.github.CloudCorpRecords/claimscope scores 38 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 io.github.CloudCorpRecords/claimscope MCP server expose?

io.github.CloudCorpRecords/claimscope exposes 12 tools: ecca_synthesize, ecca_pre_mortem, ecca_decision_tournament, ecca_bts_divergence, ecca_refine, and 7 more. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 833 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.

Is the io.github.CloudCorpRecords/claimscope MCP server still maintained?

io.github.CloudCorpRecords/claimscope is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 5 November 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.

What licence is the io.github.CloudCorpRecords/claimscope MCP server under?

io.github.CloudCorpRecords/claimscope declares the MIT licence, which is OSI-approved. That covers the source only, and says nothing about the cost of any service it calls.