CdpHub
REMOTE · CDPHUB.COM
Find which CDPs connect to your tools, compare CDP catalogs, and check a whole stack
Available components
Last scanned (7 hours ago)
Scores higher than 66% of remote servers
Reachable. Last reached 5 Nov 2026.
Category Search and Retrieval
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
- 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. Nothing on it is marked destructive, but we can't show that an anonymous caller can only read: full credit needs the server to list at least one tool and every tool to be verifiably read-only. We use a best-effort check of tool names and descriptions to tell read-only tools from tools that change things, so some genuinely read-only tools may not get full credit. Names that start with a read verb (get, list, read, search and similar) and accurate readOnlyHint annotations help. Meet that to earn full credit, or require authorisation. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Partial
- 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 Usability71
- AI-judged instruction clarity (excellent).Pass
- Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 1027 tokens (~171/item across 6 items; 6 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 Management20
- Stability observed for 6 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 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
Capabilities100
- Implements a supported MCP spec version (2025-11-25); the latest is 2026-07-28.Pass
Checks we ran (13)
- TLS certificate
- Authorization
- HTTPS
- HSTS header
- DNSSEC
- Transport
- Schema quality
- Stability
- Tool coverage
- Injection markers
- Destructive annotations
- Judged manipulation
- MCP protocol
Does not apply to this hosted endpoint (2)
- Supply Chain SecurityScored on package channels only. This is a hosted endpoint, so there is nothing to install or inspect.
- Provenance & TransparencyScored on package channels only. This is a hosted endpoint, so there is nothing to install or inspect.
The score does not measure everything. What the score does not measure →
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 +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.
- 3 Nov 26 +1
- Tool “check_stack” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- 1 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 3 to 7. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 1 days of observed history at the previous scan, 2 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 31 Oct 26 0
- Stability: unverified → 0.03 ▲ functional
- 30 Oct 26 73
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://cdphub.com/functions/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=cdphub.com | CN=WE1,O=Google Trust Services,C=US | 9 Sept 2026 | 8 Dec 2026 | ECDSA 256 | ECDSA-SHA256 | 6f85028d6ba69ab1139b03a11e75e870 |
| SANs: cdphub.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 cdphub.com. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | Trust anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| com. | DS published | 19718 | 13 | Verified |
| cdphub.com. | No DS | 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=31536000 |
| referrer-policy | strict-origin-when-cross-origin |
Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →
Transports 2 probes
| Transport | URL | Outcome | Status | Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| streamable-http | https://cdphub.com/functions/mcp | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://cdphub.com/functions/mcp | HTTPS enforced | 301 | https://cdphub.com/functions/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 →
check_stack Check a stack ~162
Check a stack of two to ten tools against every CDP in CdpHub's directory, as the stack check on cdphub.com does: how many CDPs list all of them and which, those CDPs grouped by how they connect to each tool with each group counted, how they connect to each tool on its own with each group counted and a sentence for it, the CDPs that miss exactly one tool grouped by the tool they miss, and a link to the same check on cdphub.com. Use it for any question about two or more tools together, such as which CDPs fit a company's stack.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| tools | array | yes | The tools, for example ["Shopify", "Klaviyo", "Snowflake"]: two to ten. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
compare_cdps Compare two CDPs ~104
Compare two CDPs' integration catalogs in CdpHub's directory, tool by tool: how many tools both list, how many only one does, the most widely listed tools in both, each side's largest categories of tools the other lacks, and the link to their comparison page on cdphub.com.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| a | string | yes | The first CDP, for example "Segment". |
| b | string | yes | The second CDP, for example "mParticle". |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_cdp Look up a CDP ~109
Look up one customer data platform's integration catalog in CdpHub's directory: its number of tools and listings and its rank by catalog size, which way its integrations run, its largest categories with their most widely listed tools, how it connects to the main data warehouses, the CDPs that list the most of the same tools, and its page on cdphub.com.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | string | yes | The CDP, for example "Segment", "Braze" or "Adobe Experience Platform". |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_tool Look up a tool ~162
Look up one marketing or data tool (for example Snowflake, Braze, Google Ads or The Trade Desk) in CdpHub's directory: how many of the customer data platforms (CDPs) it tracks list an integration with it, each CDP counted once (both sends data to it and reads from it, only sends, only reads), which CDPs list it in each group and which don't, every listing with its direction, how it runs (server-side, client-side, in the warehouse) and a link to the CDP's own documentation, and the tool's page on cdphub.com. Use it for any question about one tool.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | string | yes | The tool, for example "Snowflake" or "Google Ads". |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
list_cdps List the CDPs ~46
List every customer data platform in CdpHub's directory with its number of tools and listings and its page on cdphub.com, largest catalog first, with the directory's totals.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
search_directory Search the directory ~254
Search CdpHub's directory of CDP integrations by keyword, CDP, category, direction or how the integration runs. Returns the exact totals, the first results and the link to the same search on cdphub.com. Use get_tool for one named tool and check_stack for several.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| categories | array | – | Only these categories, for example ["Advertising"]. |
| cdps | array | – | Only these CDPs, for example ["Tealium"]. |
| directions | array | – | Which way data moves, from the CDP's side: "out" sends data to the tool, "into" reads from it, "both", or "unknown" when the listing doesn't say. |
| group | string | – | Group the results by tool or by listing. Leave it out to let the directory decide. |
| query | string | – | Words to search for in tool, listing and CDP names, categories and descriptions, for example "reverse etl". |
| runs | array | – | How the integration runs: server-side, client-side, through a warehouse, or "none" when the listing doesn't say. |
| sort | string | – | The result order. Leave it out to let the directory decide. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the CdpHub MCP server?
CdpHub is a hosted endpoint at https://cdphub.com/functions/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 · cdphub.com
claude mcp add --transport http com-cdphub-cdphub 'https://cdphub.com/functions/mcp'
What is the CdpHub MCP server?
CdpHub is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as com.cdphub/cdphub. Find which CDPs connect to your tools, compare CDP catalogs, and check a whole stack. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://cdphub.com/functions/mcp).
Is the CdpHub MCP server safe to use?
CdpHub scores 76 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 CdpHub MCP server expose?
CdpHub exposes 6 tools: get_tool, check_stack, compare_cdps, get_cdp, list_cdps, search_directory. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 837 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the CdpHub MCP server require authentication?
No. We connected to CdpHub without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.
Is the CdpHub MCP server still maintained?
CdpHub 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 did VerifyMCP test on the CdpHub MCP server?
VerifyMCP ran 13 checks on CdpHub, covering TLS certificate, Authorization, HTTPS, HSTS header and 9 more. Supply Chain Security and Provenance & Transparency do not apply to a hosted endpoint, so they were not tested. The score does not measure everything, and the scoring documentation lists what it leaves out.