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.

Loyalist Reservations

REMOTE · AGENT.EATLOYALIST.COM

Book tables at restaurants on the Loyalist network. No login; read availability, then book.

+3 this week 78 Trust /100

Last scanned (8 hours ago)

Scores higher than 76% of remote servers

Reachable. Last reached 5 Nov 2026.

Category E-commerce

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
  • 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
Schema Quality & AI Usability57
  • AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
  • Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 1757 tokens (~351/item across 5 items; 5 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 Coverage67
  • 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
  • 0% of tool parameters carry a description.Fail
Tool Safety100
  • No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
  • We read all 5 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
  • An AI judge read all 6 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
What we tested

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 →

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.

  • 5 Nov 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.

  • 3 Nov 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.

  • 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.

  • 29 Oct 26 +1
    • Server version: 1.28.1 → 1.30.0 functional
  • 27 Oct 26 +1

    No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 40 to 43. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 12 days of observed history at the previous scan, 13 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.

  • 25 Oct 26 +1

    No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 33 to 37. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 10 days of observed history at the previous scan, 11 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.

  • 23 Oct 26 +1

    No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 27 to 30. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 8 days of observed history at the previous scan, 9 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.

  • 21 Oct 26 +1
    • The server rewrote its instructions, which are the text every model session reads security
    • The server changed its declared name: loyalist-reservations → orion-reservations security
    • Tool “find_venues” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
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://agent.eatloyalist.com/mcp

TLS valid

Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 .

Subject Issuer Valid from Valid until Key Signature Serial
CN=agent.eatloyalist.com CN=YR2,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US 6 Oct 2026 4 Jan 2027 RSA 2048 SHA256-RSA 6e19ae1fe82af61b36ca15b21769d10cc49
SANs: agent.eatloyalist.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 agent.eatloyalist.com. — Not signed

Zone DS Keys Algorithms Outcome
. Trust anchor 20326, 38696 8, 8 Verified
com. DS published 19718 13 Verified
eatloyalist.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; includeSubDomains; preload

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

Transports 2 probes
Transport URL Outcome Status Location
streamable-http https://agent.eatloyalist.com/mcp Verified 200
http (plaintext) http://agent.eatloyalist.com/mcp HTTPS enforced 308 https://agent.eatloyalist.com/mcp
MCP tools · 5 exposed · ~1,226 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
book ~345

Book a table. This takes a real table at a real restaurant. Pass a `slot_id` from get_availability. Confirm the venue, date, time and party size with the person before calling this, and do not call it speculatively: there is no cancel tool, so a booking made by mistake has to be undone by the guest phoning the restaurant. Calling it twice with identical arguments is safe and returns the same reservation rather than taking a second table. Changing the slot or the guest makes it a different booking, so re-read availability rather than editing the arguments to "retry". `phone` is optional here but required by some venues; omitting it can come back as `guest_field_required`. `note` reaches the restaurant as the reservation's note. `source` is where you found this venue: if the restaurant's own website told you a value to pass (in its markup or llms.txt), send it here so the restaurant can see its own site drove the booking. Leave it out if you did not arrive through one. `reservation_id` is for your own use, to read the booking back with get_reservation. It is not a confirmation number the venue knows, so do not read it out to the guest: tell them the restaurant, date, time and party size instead.

NameTypeReqDescription
emailstringyes–
first_namestringyes–
last_namestringyes–
note–––
phone–––
slot_idstringyes–
source–––

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

find_venues ~172

Restaurants bookable through this network, and what each one's system supports. Returns every venue that has opted in, across restaurant groups. Two optional filters narrow it, never widen it: `signup_form_id` to one website's venues when you found an Orion signup embed on a restaurant's page, and `venue_id` to a single venue when you already have its loyalist-venue-id (off a page's markup or a ReserveAction entry point) and want just that one rather than listing them all and matching yourself. Neither can reach a venue that has not opted in. A venue with `bookable: false` has no reservation system connected and will return no availability.

NameTypeReqDescription
signup_form_id–––
venue_id–––

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

get_availability ~155

Bookable times at one venue, on one date, for one party size. `date` is the venue's own local calendar date, `YYYY-MM-DD`. Each slot carries a `slot_id` to pass to book and a `starts_at` that is a full venue-local datetime, so a service running past midnight is unambiguous without you having to infer the day. An empty `slots` list means nothing is open on those terms, not that the venue is closed. Try a different time, party size or date before telling someone it is full.

NameTypeReqDescription
datestringyes–
party_sizeintegeryes–
venue_idstringyes–

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

get_reservation ~78

Read one booking this credential made back from the venue. Use it to confirm a booking landed. A `status` of `pending` means the venue has not answered yet, not that it failed; treat anything you do not recognise as non-terminal rather than reporting a failure.

NameTypeReqDescription
reservation_idstringyes–

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

join_waitlist ~476

Ask to be told if a table opens at a time the guest actually wants. This is not a reservation and never becomes one by itself. The venue contacts the guest if something frees up, so say that plainly rather than implying a table is held. Offer it whenever the guest cannot get a time that suits them, which is far more often than a venue being completely full: someone who wants 7:30 and is offered 5:00 or 9:45 may well prefer to wait for 7:30. An empty get_availability is only the most obvious case. Try other times, party sizes and dates first, then ask whether they would rather wait than take a time that does not work. Record what they wanted in `time_range`, not the time you found. `date` is the venue's own local calendar date, `YYYY-MM-DD`. `time_range` is required and is the window in the guest's words, like "7:00 PM - 9:00 PM" or "7:00 PM"; ask the guest for it rather than guessing, because the venue works the list by when people wanted to come. The email address is where the confirmation goes, so it must be the guest's own. Not every venue accepts these. One that does not refuses with a message saying so, which is an answer, not an error to retry. There is no reference number to give the guest, so the response is the only record either of you gets. Confirm it back to them by the restaurant, date and time. Mention the confirmation email only when `confirmation_sent` is true. When it is false the request is still on the venue's list, the note simply did not go out, so say they are on the list and that no email is coming rather than promising one.

NameTypeReqDescription
datestringyes–
emailstringyes–
first_namestringyes–
last_namestringyes–
notes–––
party_sizeintegeryes–
phone–––
time_rangestringyes–
venue_idstringyes–

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

Install

How do I install the Loyalist Reservations MCP server?

Loyalist Reservations is a hosted endpoint at https://agent.eatloyalist.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 · agent.eatloyalist.com

# add to Claude Code
claude mcp add --transport http com-eatloyalist-restaurant-reservations 'https://agent.eatloyalist.com/mcp'
Common questions

What is the Loyalist Reservations MCP server?

Loyalist Reservations is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as com.eatloyalist/restaurant-reservations. Book tables at restaurants on the Loyalist network. No login; read availability, then book. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://agent.eatloyalist.com/mcp).

Is the Loyalist Reservations MCP server safe to use?

Loyalist Reservations scores 78 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 Loyalist Reservations MCP server expose?

Loyalist Reservations exposes 5 tools: find_venues, get_availability, book, get_reservation, join_waitlist. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 1,226 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.

Does the Loyalist Reservations MCP server require authentication?

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

Is the Loyalist Reservations MCP server still maintained?

Loyalist Reservations 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 Loyalist Reservations MCP server?

VerifyMCP ran 13 checks on Loyalist Reservations, 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.