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.

Cairn

REMOTE · CAIRNSAFE.COM

Workplace safety citation counts, penalties and 29 CFR standards data for AI assistants

Available components

+3 this week 81 Trust /100

Last scanned (2 hours ago)

Scores higher than 84% of remote servers

Reachable. Last reached 5 Nov 2026.

Category Health and Science

Trust breakdown (7 categories)

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 Security80
Transport & Reachability100
Schema Quality & AI Usability67
  • AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
  • Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 442 tokens (~147/item across 3 items; 3 tools + 0 resources), over budget; trim descriptions and params. See how to fix → Fail
  • 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 Coverage87
  • 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
  • 60% 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 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
Capabilities100
  • Implements a supported MCP spec version (2025-11-25); the latest is 2026-07-28.Pass
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.

  • 4 Nov 26 +1

    No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 67 to 70. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 20 days of observed history at the previous scan, 21 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.

  • 2 Nov 26 +1

    No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 60 to 63. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 18 days of observed history at the previous scan, 19 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.

  • 31 Oct 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.

  • 28 Oct 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.

  • 26 Oct 26 +1

    No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 37 to 40. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 11 days of observed history at the previous scan, 12 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.

  • 24 Oct 26 +1

    No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 30 to 33. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 9 days of observed history at the previous scan, 10 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.

  • 22 Oct 26 +1

    No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 23 to 27. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 7 days of observed history at the previous scan, 8 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.

  • 20 Oct 26 +1

    No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 17 to 20. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 5 days of observed history at the previous scan, 6 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.

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 · Probed https://cairnsafe.com/mcp

TLS valid

Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .

Subject Issuer Valid from Valid until Key Signature Serial
CN=cairnsafe.com CN=YR1,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US 12 Oct 2026 10 Jan 2027 RSA 2048 SHA256-RSA 6c7a658b92b842b34052e6c4bfe12fc35d0
SANs: cairnsafe.com
CN=YR1,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US (CA) CN=Root YR,O=ISRG,C=US 3 Sept 2025 2 Sept 2028 RSA 2048 SHA256-RSA a20253f15f2691c05dc1ce13b9bcca4e
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 cairnsafe.com. — Not signed

Zone DS Keys Algorithms Outcome
. trust_anchor 20326, 38696 8, 8 Verified
com. present 19718 13 Verified
cairnsafe.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
strict-transport-security max-age=63072000; includeSubDomains; preload
content-security-policy frame-ancestors 'self'; object-src 'none'; base-uri 'self'
x-content-type-options nosniff
x-frame-options SAMEORIGIN
referrer-policy strict-origin-when-cross-origin
permissions-policy camera=(), microphone=(), geolocation=(), payment=(), usb=(), browsing-topics=()

Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →

Transports 2 probes
Transport URL Outcome Status Location
streamable-http https://cairnsafe.com/mcp Verified 200
http (plaintext) http://cairnsafe.com/mcp HTTPS enforced 308 https://cairnsafe.com/mcp
MCP tools · 3 exposed · ~306 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
get_standard ~100

Headline enforcement figures for one 29 CFR section, such as 1910.147 or 1926.501: citations and inspections since 2016, total penalties, the median penalty per violation, its rank, and how many interpretation letters cite it, with links.

NameTypeReqDescription
sectionstringyesA 29 CFR section such as "1910.147". Paragraph references like "1910.147(c)(4)(i)" are accepted.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

search_standards ~104

Find workplace safety standards (29 CFR sections) by section number or by words in the title, such as "1910.14", "lockout", "fall protection" or "forklift". Returns up to 10 standards cited at least 50 times since 2016, most cited first, with headline figures and a link.

NameTypeReqDescription
limitinteger––
querystringyesA section number or prefix, or words from the section title.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

top_cited_standards ~102

The 10 most-cited 29 CFR safety standards since 2016, for all standards or one CFR part: 1910 general industry, 1926 construction, 1904 recordkeeping, 1915 shipyards, 1917 marine terminals, 1918 longshoring, 1928 agriculture.

NameTypeReqDescription
cfr_partstring–Optional CFR part, such as "1926".
limitinteger––

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

Install

How do I install the Cairn MCP server?

Cairn is a hosted endpoint at https://cairnsafe.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 · cairnsafe.com

# add to Claude Code
claude mcp add --transport http com-cairnsafe-cairn 'https://cairnsafe.com/mcp'
Common questions

What is the Cairn MCP server?

Cairn is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as com.cairnsafe/cairn. Workplace safety citation counts, penalties and 29 CFR standards data for AI assistants. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://cairnsafe.com/mcp).

Is the Cairn MCP server safe to use?

Cairn scores 81 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 Cairn MCP server expose?

Cairn exposes 3 tools: search_standards, get_standard, top_cited_standards. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 306 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.

Does the Cairn MCP server require authentication?

No. We connected to Cairn without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.

Is the Cairn MCP server still maintained?

Cairn 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.