GTMMCPs GTM Research
REMOTE · ANDREWCMCGUIRE.COM
Read-only, sourced and dated research on GTM software and its MCP servers.
Available components
Last scanned (4 hours ago)
Scores higher than 52% of remote servers
Reachable. Last reached 5 Nov 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 Usability60
- AI-judged instruction clarity (fair).Partial
- Tool/resource definitions use about 468 tokens (~78/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 Management13
- Stability observed for 4 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
Tool Coverage69
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 8% 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 7 captured unit(s) of tool text and found none that tries to manipulate the model reading it.Pass
Capabilities60
- Spec-recency check failed: implements MCP spec 2025-06-18; the latest is 2026-07-28. See how to fix → Fail
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.
- 4 Nov 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.
- 2 Nov 26 +1
- Stability: unverified → 0.03 ▲ functional
- 1 Nov 26 64
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 5 Nov 2026 · Probed https://andrewcmcguire.com/gtm-directory/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=andrewcmcguire.com | CN=YE1,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US | 25 Oct 2026 | 23 Jan 2027 | ECDSA 256 | ECDSA-SHA384 | 653e8ad51765a287d1edad988ea89d3ed07 |
| SANs: *.andrewcmcguire.com, andrewcmcguire.com | ||||||
| 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 andrewcmcguire.com. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | trust_anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| com. | present | 19718 | 13 | Verified |
| andrewcmcguire.com. | 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://andrewcmcguire.com/gtm-directory/mcp | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://andrewcmcguire.com/gtm-directory/mcp | HTTPS enforced | 301 | https://andrewcmcguire.com/gtm-directory/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 →
compare_gtm_tools ~39
Compare two to five exact catalog IDs from search_gtm_tools, preserving unknown detailed coverage and individual sources.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| tool_ids | array | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_company_guide ~54
Retrieve the sourced guide for a company slug or catalog ID. Only selected companies have detailed research. Suite IDs return choose_product with separate guide IDs. Unknown IDs return not_researched.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| company_id | string | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_gtm_updates ~46
Read reviewed updates, optionally for a company slug. Research additions are distinct from vendor announcements; monitoring coverage is explicit.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| company_id | – | – | – |
| limit | integer | – | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
plan_gtm_workflow ~110
Build a design only for intent expansion-account-review from a complete structured request. Returns the artifact, plan, source provenance, missing questions, and a non-sending message preview. Unsupported intents/adapters return supported scope and missing capabilities. The request follows the bundled request.schema.json contract. This tool does not connect to customer systems, read customer records, run SQL, schedule work, write records, or send messages.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| request | object | yes | Complete structured request object for plan_gtm_workflow. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
research_gtm_question ~117
Retrieve evidence for a plain-English tool question. Returns citations, scope labels and company-level limitations with source links. Limitations may not apply to every answer. Restrict company_id when asking about one vendor. Use evidence_type=vendor_documentation for documented capabilities or editorial_guidance for directory advice; omit for mixed evidence and biographies. If choose_product is returned, select a product ID before making capability claims.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| company_id | – | – | – |
| evidence_type | – | – | – |
| limit | integer | – | – |
| question | string | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
search_gtm_tools ~59
Find candidate GTM tools by name or task. Returns catalog IDs, dates, source links and recorded MCP status; does not verify suitability.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | integer | – | – |
| mcp_status | – | – | – |
| query | string | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the GTMMCPs GTM Research MCP server?
GTMMCPs GTM Research is a hosted endpoint at https://andrewcmcguire.com/gtm-directory/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 · andrewcmcguire.com
claude mcp add --transport http com-andrewcmcguire-gtm-directory 'https://andrewcmcguire.com/gtm-directory/mcp'
What is the GTMMCPs GTM Research MCP server?
GTMMCPs GTM Research is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as com.andrewcmcguire/gtm-directory. Read-only, sourced and dated research on GTM software and its MCP servers. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://andrewcmcguire.com/gtm-directory/mcp).
Is the GTMMCPs GTM Research MCP server safe to use?
GTMMCPs GTM Research scores 66 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 GTMMCPs GTM Research MCP server expose?
GTMMCPs GTM Research exposes 6 tools: search_gtm_tools, get_company_guide, research_gtm_question, compare_gtm_tools, get_gtm_updates, plan_gtm_workflow. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 425 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the GTMMCPs GTM Research MCP server require authentication?
No. We connected to GTMMCPs GTM Research without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.
Is the GTMMCPs GTM Research MCP server still maintained?
GTMMCPs GTM Research 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.