Cadencz
REMOTE · API.CADENCZ.COM · SCANNED SEP 30
Plan, draft, schedule and publish social posts grounded in your Website Brain.
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 Security89
- The endpoint's TLS certificate is valid, in date, and uses a strong key. View diagnostics → Pass
- Authorisation is enforced on tool calls, but the challenge carries no valid RFC 9728 metadata, so a client cannot discover where to get a token. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
- 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 Usability69
- AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
- Tool/resource definitions use about 447 tokens (~31/item across 14 items; 14 tools + 0 resources), lean.Pass
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management87
- Stability observed for 26 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
- 7% of tool parameters carry a description.Partial
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; "publish_now" implies "publish" 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 15 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
How do I install the Cadencz MCP server?
Cadencz is a hosted endpoint at https://api.cadencz.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 · api.cadencz.com
claude mcp add --transport http com-cadencz-cadencz 'https://api.cadencz.com/mcp'
{
"mcpServers": {
"com-cadencz-cadencz": {
"url": "https://api.cadencz.com/mcp"
}
}
} {
"servers": {
"com-cadencz-cadencz": {
"type": "http",
"url": "https://api.cadencz.com/mcp"
}
}
} [mcp_servers.com-cadencz-cadencz] url = "https://api.cadencz.com/mcp"
{
"$schema": "https://opencode.ai/config.json",
"mcp": {
"com-cadencz-cadencz": {
"type": "remote",
"url": "https://api.cadencz.com/mcp",
"enabled": true
}
}
} openclaw mcp add com-cadencz-cadencz --url 'https://api.cadencz.com/mcp' --transport streamable-http
mcp_servers:
com-cadencz-cadencz:
url: "https://api.cadencz.com/mcp" {
"McpServers": {
"com-cadencz-cadencz": {
"Transport": "http",
"Url": "https://api.cadencz.com/mcp"
}
}
} assistant mcp add com-cadencz-cadencz -t streamable-http -u 'https://api.cadencz.com/mcp'
{
"mcpServers": {
"com-cadencz-cadencz": {
"type": "http",
"url": "https://api.cadencz.com/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.
- 30 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 83 to 87. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 25 days of observed history at the previous scan, 26 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 28 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
- 26 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 70 to 73. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 21 days of observed history at the previous scan, 22 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 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
- 24 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.
- 22 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 57 to 60. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 17 days of observed history at the previous scan, 18 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 50 to 53. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 15 days of observed history at the previous scan, 16 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 43 to 47. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 13 days of observed history at the previous scan, 14 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 30 Sept 2026 · Probed https://api.cadencz.com/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=api.cadencz.com | CN=YR2,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US | 18 Sept 2026 | 17 Dec 2026 | RSA 2048 | SHA256-RSA | 5f555302eccb6cb3045a25c401a910d1f41 |
| SANs: api.cadencz.com | ||||||
| CN=YR2,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US (CA) | CN=Root YR,O=ISRG,C=US | 3 Sept 2025 | 2 Sept 2028 | RSA 2048 | SHA256-RSA | 4ebd24947e24d394802d84a52fd5b319 |
| CN=Root YR,O=ISRG,C=US (CA) | CN=ISRG Root X1,O=Internet Security Research Group,C=US | 13 May 2026 | 2 Sept 2032 | RSA 4096 | SHA256-RSA | f24b6d17f9d9ad7cb1c9fea78782699f |
Background: What to check on a remote MCP endpoint →
DNSSEC insecure
Validation of api.cadencz.com. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | trust_anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| com. | present | 19718 | 13 | Verified |
| cadencz.com. | absent | Unsigned (proven) parent-signed NSEC/NSEC3 proves an unsigned delegation |
Authentication Challenged, unverified
The endpoint asked for a token, but we could not retrieve and validate the RFC 9728 metadata that tells a client how to obtain one.
| Result | Challenged, unverified |
|---|---|
| Enforced | On tool calls |
| HTTP status | 200 |
| Header | Value |
|---|---|
| strict-transport-security | max-age=63072000 |
Protected resource metadata
| Retrieved | No |
|---|---|
| Problem | no_resource_metadata |
Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →
Transports 2 probes
| Transport | URL | Outcome | Status | Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| streamable-http | https://api.cadencz.com/mcp | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://api.cadencz.com/mcp | HTTPS enforced | 308 | https://api.cadencz.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 →
approve_plan_item ~27
Approve a plan item into a scheduled post.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| item_id | string | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
cancel_scheduled_post ~26
Pull a scheduled variant back to draft.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| variant_id | string | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
compose_post ~60
Write one platform-native post from an idea, grounded in the Brain (the workspace's, unless brain_id names another). Draws one AI generation.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| brain_id | string | – | – |
| idea | string | yes | – |
| platform | string | – | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_analytics ~24
Engagement totals per platform over a window.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| days | integer | – | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_current_plan ~18
The current weekly content plan and its items.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_plan_usage ~20
Allowance usage against the plan's caps this period.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
list_brains ~17
The Website Brains in this workspace.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
list_channels ~18
Connected social accounts and whether the plan covers them.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
list_scheduled_posts ~26
Posts committed to publish in the coming days.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| days | integer | – | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
list_workspaces ~17
The workspaces this token can see.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
plan_week ~24
Run Plan My Week. Each planned post draws from the shared AI-generation allowance.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
publish_now ~39
Queue a variant for immediate delivery. Irreversible; requires confirm: true.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| confirm | boolean | yes | – |
| variant_id | string | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
query_brain ~46
Retrieve product context from a Brain for a question. Defaults to the workspace's Brain when brain_id is omitted.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| brain_id | string | – | – |
| question | string | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
schedule_post ~45
Schedule a draft variant for a moment in time.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| scheduled_at | string | yes | ISO 8601 |
| timezone | string | – | – |
| variant_id | string | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
What is the Cadencz MCP server?
Cadencz is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as com.cadencz/cadencz. Plan, draft, schedule and publish social posts grounded in your Website Brain. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://api.cadencz.com/mcp).
Is the Cadencz MCP server safe to use?
Cadencz scores 83 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 Cadencz MCP server expose?
Cadencz exposes 14 tools: list_workspaces, list_channels, list_brains, query_brain, get_current_plan, and 9 more. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 407 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the Cadencz MCP server require authentication?
Yes. Cadencz asked us for credentials when we connected, so you will need to authorise it in your MCP client before it can do anything.
Is the Cadencz MCP server still maintained?
Cadencz is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 30 September 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.