Lazynext Accessibility Checker
REMOTE · API.LAZYNEXT.COM
Scan URLs or HTML for WCAG 2.2 violations. 75-rule manifest, weighted score, shareable reports.
Available components
Last scanned (17 hours ago)
Scores higher than 66% of remote servers
Reachable. Last reached 25 Oct 2026.
Category Testing and QA
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 Security57
- The endpoint's TLS certificate is valid, in date, and uses a strong key. View diagnostics → Pass
- Authorisation not fully verified: no authorisation is required to call this server, and 4 tool(s) never declared a destructiveHint. The MCP spec treats an absent hint as destructive by default, so we cannot call this surface safe. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Unverified
- 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 Usability81
- AI-judged instruction clarity (excellent).Pass
- Tool/resource definitions use about 234 tokens (~58/item across 4 items; 4 tools + 0 resources), lean.Pass
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management77
- Stability observed for 23 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 4 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
Capabilities40
- Spec-recency check failed: implements MCP spec 2025-03-26; the latest is 2026-07-28. See how to fix → Fail
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.
- 25 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 73 to 77. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 22 days of observed history at the previous scan, 23 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 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.
- 21 Oct 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.
- 19 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.
- 16 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.
- 14 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.
- 12 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.
- 10 Oct 26 +2
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 17 to 27. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 5 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.
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 25 Oct 2026 · Probed https://api.lazynext.com/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=lazynext.com | CN=WE1,O=Google Trust Services,C=US | 25 Sept 2026 | 25 Dec 2026 | ECDSA 256 | ECDSA-SHA256 | a3f7130b172f9d730ec94eeb3c3e7a35 |
| SANs: lazynext.com, api.lazynext.com, *.api.lazynext.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 api.lazynext.com. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | trust_anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| com. | present | 19718 | 13 | Verified |
| lazynext.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://api.lazynext.com/mcp | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://api.lazynext.com/mcp | HTTPS enforced | 301 | https://api.lazynext.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 →
get_report ~43
Fetch a stored scan report by its id (from a prior scan_url/scan_html result).
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | string | yes | report id (the slug in the report URL) |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
list_rules ~24
List every WCAG criterion the scanner can emit, with level and detection path.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
scan_html ~40
Audit pasted HTML markup for WCAG violations (static rules — no render, no quota).
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| html | string | yes | HTML source, max 512KB |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
scan_url ~127
Render and audit a live web page for WCAG 2.1/2.2 violations. Returns score, findings, and a shareable report URL. Free tier: 3 URL scans/day/IP; pass a Pro license email for more.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| license | string | – | Pro license email (optional) |
| site | boolean | – | crawl same-origin pages (3 free / 10 Pro) |
| url | string | yes | http(s) URL to scan |
| viewport | string | – | render profile — mobile 390×844 handset (default); desktop preserves the pre-mobile baseline render |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the Lazynext Accessibility Checker MCP server?
Lazynext Accessibility Checker is a hosted endpoint at https://api.lazynext.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.lazynext.com
claude mcp add --transport http com-lazynext-accessibility-checker 'https://api.lazynext.com/mcp'
What is the Lazynext Accessibility Checker MCP server?
Lazynext Accessibility Checker is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as com.lazynext/accessibility-checker. Scan URLs or HTML for WCAG 2.2 violations. 75-rule manifest, weighted score, shareable reports. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://api.lazynext.com/mcp).
Is the Lazynext Accessibility Checker MCP server safe to use?
Lazynext Accessibility Checker 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 Lazynext Accessibility Checker MCP server expose?
Lazynext Accessibility Checker exposes 4 tools: scan_url, scan_html, get_report, list_rules. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 234 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the Lazynext Accessibility Checker MCP server require authentication?
No. We connected to Lazynext Accessibility Checker without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.
Is the Lazynext Accessibility Checker MCP server still maintained?
Lazynext Accessibility Checker is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 25 October 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.