Built with Jon — Hidden Profit Tools
REMOTE · BUILTWITHJON.COM
Read-only tools for finding where a small business leaks deals, time, and cash.
Available components
Last scanned (1 hour ago)
Scores higher than 9% of remote servers
Reachable. Last reached 24 Oct 2026.
Category Workflow Automation
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 yet verified: we couldn't confirm whether this endpoint requires it. 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 & Reachability0
- Transport check failed: declared streamable-http, but the endpoint redirected instead of responding directly. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
Schema Quality & AI Usability0
- Schema not yet verified: we couldn't read the endpoint's schema, or could read only part of its tool list.Unverified
Stability & Change Management0
- Stability not yet verified: not enough scan history yet (needs a 30-day window).Unverified
Tool Coverage0
- Tool coverage not yet verified: we couldn't read the endpoint's tools, or could read only part of the list.Unverified
Tool Safety0
- Tool safety not yet verified: we couldn't read the endpoint's tools, or could read only part of the list.Unverified
Capabilities0
- Capabilities not yet verified: we couldn't read the endpoint's capabilities.Unverified
Unverified: 5 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.
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.
- 10 Oct 26 +2
- HSTS header: fail → pass ▲ security
- Transport: Transport check failed: declared streamable-http, but the endpoint redirected instead of responding directly. security
- 28 Sept 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
- 25 Sept 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
- 26 Aug 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
- 18 Aug 26 0
- Endpoint reachability: reachable → not serving MCP ▼ security
- Stability: 0.37 → unverified ▼ security
- Transport: pass → fail ▼ security
- Authorization: Authorisation not fully verified: no authorisation is required to connect, but we couldn't read the whole tool list to see what that exposes. security
- Capabilities: fail → unverified ▼ functional
- Tool coverage: 100 → unverified ▼ functional
- 11 Aug 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
- 7 Aug 26 0
- Stability: unverified → 0.03 ▲ functional
- 6 Aug 26 0
- Transport: fail → pass ▲ security
- Authorization: Authorisation not fully verified: no authorisation is required to call this server, and 11 tool(s) never declared a destructiveHint. The MCP spec treats an absent hint as destructive by default, so we cannot call this surface safe. security
- MCP protocol: unverified → fail ▼ functional
- Tool coverage: unverified → 100 ▲ functional
- First check of Schema quality: fail functional
- First check of Schema quality: excellent functional
- First check of Schema quality: fail functional
- First check of Tool coverage: 86 functional
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 24 Oct 2026 · Probed https://builtwithjon.com/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=builtwithjon.com | CN=WE1,O=Google Trust Services,C=US | 7 Oct 2026 | 5 Jan 2027 | ECDSA 256 | ECDSA-SHA256 | e55a53beb05863fc0e3c6c129a1b1f93 |
| SANs: builtwithjon.com, *.builtwithjon.com | ||||||
| CN=WE1,O=Google Trust Services,C=US (CA) | CN=GTS Root R4,O=Google Trust Services LLC,C=US | 13 Dec 2023 | 20 Feb 2029 | ECDSA 256 | ECDSA-SHA384 | 7ff31977972c224a76155d13b6d685e3 |
| CN=GTS Root R4,O=Google Trust Services LLC,C=US (CA) | CN=GlobalSign Root CA,OU=Root CA,O=GlobalSign nv-sa,C=BE | 15 Nov 2023 | 28 Jan 2028 | ECDSA 384 | SHA256-RSA | 7fe530bf331343bedd821610493d8a1b |
Background: What to check on a remote MCP endpoint →
DNSSEC insecure
Validation of builtwithjon.com. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | trust_anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| com. | present | 19718 | 13 | Verified |
| builtwithjon.com. | absent | Unsigned (proven) parent-signed NSEC/NSEC3 proves an unsigned delegation |
Authentication Inconclusive
We could not reach the endpoint well enough to judge its authorisation posture.
| Result | Inconclusive |
|---|---|
| HTTP status | 301 |
| Header | Value |
|---|---|
| strict-transport-security | max-age=31536000 |
| 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://builtwithjon.com/mcp | Redirected | 301 | https://opendoorlearningai.com/mcp |
| http (plaintext) | http://builtwithjon.com/mcp | HTTPS enforced | 301 | https://builtwithjon.com/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 →
calculate_leak ~113
Put a monthly/annual dollar figure on one operational leak using Built with Jon's Leak Calculator math (identical to the website's). Call when a user wants to know what missed calls, slow follow-up, no-shows, unbilled change orders, or aging invoices are costing them. Missing inputs fall back to illustrative defaults and are flagged.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| calculator_id | string | yes | – |
| inputs | object | – | Numbers keyed by the field names from list_leak_calculators; omit any you don't know |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_article ~50
Get one article by slug (from search_articles), including its canonical URL and full markdown text when available.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | string | yes | Article slug, e.g. 'missed-call-math-home-services' |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_frameworks ~61
Get Built with Jon's decision frameworks: the Five Dispositions (the five-question treatment every workflow step gets before anyone automates anything) and the 5-phase implementation process. Call when discussing how to decide what to automate.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| section | string | – | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_hidden_profit_review_info ~61
Get the details of the Hidden Profit Review — Jonathan Malkin's paid, measured review of one recurring business workflow (deliverables, worked sample, waitlist mechanics, capacity). Call when a user wants professional help finding or fixing a profit leak.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_use_case ~88
Get one use case from the library in full: the pain, the workflow as it actually runs, per-step verdicts (eliminate / simplify / automate / optimize / report) with rationale, where AI genuinely fits, and the after state. Ids look like 'A1' or 'S3'.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | string | yes | Use case id, e.g. 'A1' |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
list_leak_calculators ~71
List the 10 leak calculators (missed calls, slow bids, unbilled change orders, unanswered inquiries, engagement-letter delay, cold DMs, slow quotes, no-shows, first-reply speed, invoice aging) with their input fields and defaults. Use before calculate_leak.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
list_use_case_categories ~57
List the 15 categories of the Built with Jon Use Case Library (96 worked small-business AI/automation examples), grouped by business function, industry, and personal, with counts and key stats. Call this first to orient before searching.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
run_scorecard ~347
Run Built with Jon's 3-minute AI Workflow Scorecard: ask the user these questions conversationally, then call this with their answers to get a scored verdict on where their business is leaking deals, time, and cash — plus the first fix worth making. Same deterministic scoring as builtwithjon.com/scorecard/. No email or signup involved.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| q2 | string | yes | A new lead comes in. How fast does someone respond? |
| q3 | string | yes | A lead doesn't buy right away. Then what? |
| q4 | string | – | Roughly how many new leads or inquiries come in a month? (optional — flavors the reading, does not affect the score) |
| q5 | string | – | How many hours a week do you spend on admin, chasing status, and re-typing the same information? (optional — flavors the reading, does not affect the score) |
| q6 | string | yes | How much of your work lives across separate tools you copy between by hand? |
| q7 | string | yes | How often does work get redone because of a miss, a gap, or bad information? |
| q8 | string | yes | After work is done, how fast do you invoice and get paid? |
| q9 | string | – | Optional: roughly, what's monthly revenue? (optional — flavors the reading, does not affect the score) |
| segment | string | yes | What kind of business is this? gc = General contracting; re = Real estate; hs = Home services & trades; pm = Property management; ps = Professional services; hw = Health & wellness; cc = Coaching or… |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
search_articles ~107
Search Jonathan Malkin's ~50 articles on small-business workflow leaks, Claude Code infrastructure (the Jules system), AI agents, and AI operations. Filter by keyword and/or tag; returns titles, descriptions, and slugs for get_article.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | number | – | Max results, 1-20 (default 10) |
| query | string | – | Keyword matched against title, description, tags, and body |
| tag | string | – | Exact tag match, case-insensitive |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
search_use_cases ~165
Search the 96-entry Use Case Library of small-business AI and automation workflows. Call this when a user describes a recurring business pain (missed leads, invoice chasing, status meetings, no-shows...) to find worked examples with per-step automation verdicts. Filter by keyword, category, frequency, automation level, or disposition.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| automation | string | – | – |
| category_id | string | – | Category id from list_use_case_categories |
| disposition | string | – | Only use cases where some step gets this verdict |
| frequency | string | – | Substring match on frequency, e.g. 'daily', 'weekly', 'monthly', 'per hire' |
| query | string | – | Keyword matched against name, subject, pain line, workflow steps, and AI-fit text |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
start_here ~56
START HERE if you are new to Built with Jon. Explains every tool, why to use it, what it returns, how the tools work together, and the best first prompt for finding a leak in deals, time, or cash.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the Built with Jon — Hidden Profit Tools MCP server?
Built with Jon — Hidden Profit Tools is a hosted endpoint at https://builtwithjon.com/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 · builtwithjon.com
claude mcp add --transport http com-builtwithjon-builtwithjon 'https://builtwithjon.com/mcp'
What is the Built with Jon — Hidden Profit Tools MCP server?
Built with Jon — Hidden Profit Tools is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as com.builtwithjon/builtwithjon. Read-only tools for finding where a small business leaks deals, time, and cash. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://builtwithjon.com/mcp).
Is the Built with Jon — Hidden Profit Tools MCP server safe to use?
Built with Jon — Hidden Profit Tools scores 25 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 Built with Jon — Hidden Profit Tools MCP server expose?
Built with Jon — Hidden Profit Tools exposes 11 tools: start_here, list_use_case_categories, search_use_cases, get_use_case, run_scorecard, and 6 more. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 1,176 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the Built with Jon — Hidden Profit Tools MCP server require authentication?
Its publisher declares no required credentials for Built with Jon — Hidden Profit Tools. We have not been able to confirm that against the live endpoint, and a server can require authorisation without declaring it here.
Is the Built with Jon — Hidden Profit Tools MCP server still maintained?
Built with Jon — Hidden Profit Tools is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 24 October 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.