EU AI Act Explorer
REMOTE · MCP.EUAIACTLAW.COM
Read-only EU AI Act (Reg. 2024/1689 as amended) answers, citing official sources
Available components
Last scanned (4 hours ago)
Scores higher than 61% of remote servers
Reachable. Last reached 5 Nov 2026.
Category Education and Research
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 Security74
- 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. Every tool declares its destructiveHint and none is destructive, so open access doesn't expose one. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Partial
- HTTPS is enforced; there's no plaintext access path. View diagnostics → Pass
- HSTS check failed: the Strict-Transport-Security header is absent. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
- 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 Usability58
- AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
- Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 2298 tokens (~255/item across 9 items; 9 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 Management47
- Stability observed for 14 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
Tool Coverage98
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 94% of tool parameters carry a description.Partial
- Structured output schemas are declared (100% of tools); any adoption earns full credit.Pass
Tool Safety100
- No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
- All 1 tool(s) whose name or description implies an irreversible operation declare an MCP destructiveHint annotation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 10 captured unit(s) of tool text and found none that tries to manipulate the model reading it.Pass
Capabilities100
- Implements a current MCP spec version (2026-07-28).Pass
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 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.
- 1 Nov 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.
- 30 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.
- 28 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.
- 26 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 10 to 13. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 3 days of observed history at the previous scan, 4 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 25 Oct 26 0
- Tool “send_feedback” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- “send_feedback” reworded the description of “category” cosmetic
- “send_feedback” reworded the description of “message” cosmetic
- 24 Oct 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.
- 23 Oct 26 +8
- Authorization: unverified → partial ▲ security
- Schema quality: pass → fail ▼ functional
- Tool coverage: 67% → 94% ▲ functional
- Stability: unverified → 0.03 ▲ functional
- MCP protocol: fail → pass ▲ functional
- Tool “get_annex” now declares an output schema ▲ functional
- Tool “get_article” now declares an output schema ▲ functional
- Tool “get_deadlines” now declares an output schema ▲ functional
- Tool “get_definition” now declares an output schema ▲ functional
- Tool “get_obligations” now declares an output schema ▲ functional
- Tool “get_recital” now declares an output schema ▲ functional
- Tool “search_text” now declares an output schema ▲ functional
- First check of Tool coverage: 100 functional
- Destructive annotations: pass → 100 functional
- MCP protocol version: 2025-03-26 → 2026-07-28 functional
- New tool “assess_compliance” functional
- New tool “send_feedback” functional
- “get_obligations” added an optional parameter “fields” cosmetic
- “get_obligations” added an optional parameter “limit” cosmetic
- “get_obligations” added an optional parameter “offset” cosmetic
- “search_text” added an optional parameter “limit” cosmetic
- “get_obligations” reworded the description of “risk_tier” cosmetic
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://mcp.euaiactlaw.com/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=euaiactlaw.com | CN=WE1,O=Google Trust Services,C=US | 22 Oct 2026 | 20 Jan 2027 | ECDSA 256 | ECDSA-SHA256 | af3a84ac2c30ab0c13a509fbebda99d4 |
| SANs: euaiactlaw.com, mcp.euaiactlaw.com, *.mcp.euaiactlaw.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 mcp.euaiactlaw.com. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | trust_anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| com. | present | 19718 | 13 | Verified |
| euaiactlaw.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 |
Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →
Transports 2 probes
| Transport | URL | Outcome | Status | Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| streamable-http | https://mcp.euaiactlaw.com/mcp | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://mcp.euaiactlaw.com/mcp | HTTPS enforced | 302 | https://euaiactlaw.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 →
assess_compliance ~1,730
Run the EU AI Act compliance assessment: given the entity's answers (same decision tree as the interactive checker on euaiactlaw.com), returns the applicable roles, risk classification, full obligation list with legal basis and deadlines, and notes (e.g. Annex I Section B reduced regime, open-source GPAI exception, Art 27(3) NCA notification, distributor obligations under Art 24). Pass answers keyed by step id (E1, E2, S1, R1-R5, HR1-HR6, ...); E1 (roles) is required. Multi-select steps take arrays of option ids; single-choice steps take one option id.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| E1 | array | yes | What is your role in relation to the AI system? Options: provider = Provider; deployer = Deployer; distributor = Distributor; importer = Importer; product_manufacturer = Product Manufacturer; auth_re… |
| E2 | array | – | Do you or any downstream entity make any of these modifications? Options: rename = Putting a different name or trademark on the system; repurpose = Modifying the intended purpose of a system already… |
| E3 | array | – | Does your product integrate an AI system and meet either criterion? Options: ai_with_product = AI system placed on the market together with the product under manufacturer name/trademark; ai_after_pro… |
| HR1 | array | – | Does your AI system fall within any Annex I, Section B categories? Options: aviation_security = Civil aviation security; motor_type_approval = Motor vehicles type approval; machinery = Machinery; veh… |
| HR2 | array | – | Does your AI system fall within any Annex I, Section A categories? Options: toys = Toys; recreational = Recreational craft & personal watercraft; lifts = Lifts and safety components of lifts; atex =… |
| HR3 | string | – | Is your product required to undergo third-party conformity assessment under the applicable EU laws? Options: yes = Yes — third-party conformity assessment is required; no = No — manufacturer self-dec… |
| HR4 | array | – | Does your AI system fall within any Annex III high-risk categories? Options: biometrics = Biometrics; critical_infra = Critical infrastructure; education = Educational and vocational training; employ… |
| HR5 | string | – | Does your AI system pose a significant risk of harm to health, safety, or fundamental rights? Options: yes = Yes — poses significant risk (or system performs profiling of natural persons); no = No —… |
| HR6 | array | – | Does your product include an AI system as a "safety component" AND fall within Annex I, Section A categories? Options: toys = Toys; recreational = Recreational craft & personal watercraft; lifts = Li… |
| R1 | array | – | Does your AI model meet any systemic risk criteria? (GPAI only) Options: high_flops = High impact capabilities (trained with cumulative compute >10²⁵ FLOPs); commission_decision = Commission has deci… |
| R2 | array | – | Does your system or use-case fall within any exclusion category? Options: military = AI systems developed and used exclusively for military purposes; third_country_law = Public authorities / internat… |
| R3 | array | – | Does your system perform any prohibited AI practices? Options: subliminal = Subliminal techniques, manipulation, or deception; vulnerable_exploit = Exploiting vulnerabilities of specific groups; biom… |
| R4 | array | – | Does your system perform any transparency-triggering functions? Options: deepfake = Generating or manipulating image/audio/video constituting a deep fake; public_interest_text = Generating or manipul… |
| R5 | string | – | Are you a body governed by public law, or a private entity providing public services, or operating in insurance/banking? Options: yes = Yes — public law body, public service provider, or insurance/ba… |
| S1 | array | – | Do you meet any of the following criteria for EU AI Act applicability? Options: placing_eu = I am placing on the market or putting into service AI systems in the EU; gpai_eu = I am placing on the mar… |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| checker_link | string | – | – |
| groups | array | – | – |
| obligation_count | integer | yes | – |
| obligations | array | yes | – |
| route | array | – | – |
| source | string | – | – |
| statuses | object | yes | – |
| terminal | string | yes | – |
No examples provided.
get_annex ~47
Get the full text of one annex of the EU AI Act (roman numeral).
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| number | string | yes | Annex number as roman numeral, e.g. "III", "XIV" |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| number | string | yes | – |
| permalink | string | yes | – |
| text | string | yes | – |
| title | string | – | – |
No examples provided.
get_article ~54
Get the full amended text of one article of the EU AI Act, including lettered numbers such as "60a".
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| number | string | yes | Article number, e.g. "6", "25", "60a" |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| effective_date | string | – | – |
| eurlex | string | – | – |
| number | string | yes | – |
| permalink | string | yes | – |
| text | string | yes | – |
| title | string | yes | – |
No examples provided.
get_deadlines ~52
Show which EU AI Act obligations and phases are in force or pending as of a given date.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| date | string | – | ISO date, e.g. "2027-06-01". Defaults to today. |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| as_of | string | yes | – |
| phases | array | yes | – |
No examples provided.
get_definition ~46
Get the Article 3 definition of a term used in the EU AI Act.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| term | string | yes | The defined term, e.g. "provider", "high-risk AI system" |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| permalink | string | yes | – |
| reference | string | – | – |
| term | string | yes | – |
| text | string | yes | – |
No examples provided.
get_obligations ~106
List the obligations for a role under the EU AI Act, optionally filtered by risk tier.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| fields | string | – | compact omits provision_text |
| limit | integer | – | Max obligations to return (default all, hard cap 25 per call) |
| offset | integer | – | Skip this many obligations (for paging) |
| risk_tier | string | – | Filter by risk tier; "all" = no filter. Synonyms accepted. |
| role | string | yes | – |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| count | integer | yes | – |
| obligations | array | yes | – |
| risk_tier | string | – | – |
| role | string | yes | – |
| source | string | – | – |
| total | integer | – | – |
No examples provided.
get_recital ~32
Get the full text of one recital of the EU AI Act.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| number | integer | yes | Recital number |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| number | integer | yes | – |
| permalink | string | yes | – |
| text | string | yes | – |
No examples provided.
search_text ~68
Full-text search over articles, recitals and annexes of the EU AI Act. Returns ranked matches with snippets.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | integer | – | Max results to return (default 5, hard cap 25) |
| query | string | yes | – |
| scope | string | – | Defaults to all |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | string | yes | – |
| results | array | yes | – |
| scope | string | – | – |
| total_matches | integer | yes | – |
No examples provided.
send_feedback ~140
Tell the maintainer what is wrong, what is missing, or what worked well (a wrong text, a missing amendment, a broken answer, or that this server helped you). One-way: no reply is sent.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| category | string | yes | error = something factually wrong; content_gap = correct request for missing material; useful = this server helped - say what worked; other = anything else |
| client | string | – | Optional: self-declared client name |
| message | string | yes | What is wrong, missing, or helpful. Max 1,000 characters. |
| tool | string | – | Optional: which tool the feedback is about |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| message | string | – | – |
| ok | boolean | yes | – |
No examples provided.
How do I install the EU AI Act Explorer MCP server?
EU AI Act Explorer is a hosted endpoint at https://mcp.euaiactlaw.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 · mcp.euaiactlaw.com
claude mcp add --transport http com-euaiactlaw-eu-ai-act-explorer 'https://mcp.euaiactlaw.com/mcp'
What is the EU AI Act Explorer MCP server?
EU AI Act Explorer is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as com.euaiactlaw/eu-ai-act-explorer. Read-only EU AI Act (Reg. 2024/1689 as amended) answers, citing official sources. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://mcp.euaiactlaw.com/mcp).
Is the EU AI Act Explorer MCP server safe to use?
EU AI Act Explorer scores 74 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 EU AI Act Explorer MCP server expose?
EU AI Act Explorer exposes 9 tools: get_article, get_recital, get_annex, get_definition, search_text, and 4 more. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 2,275 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the EU AI Act Explorer MCP server require authentication?
No. We connected to EU AI Act Explorer without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.
Is the EU AI Act Explorer MCP server still maintained?
EU AI Act Explorer 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.