com.lumnika/ai-crawler-readiness
REMOTE · SHOP.LUMNIKA.COM · SCANNED SEP 21
Can AI crawlers read this site? GPTBot/ClaudeBot verdicts, robots vs edge blocking, 47k-domain index
Available components
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 Security83
- The endpoint's TLS certificate is valid, in date, and uses a strong key. View diagnostics → Pass
- The endpoint enforces authorisation, but returns a challenge with no valid RFC 9728 metadata, so a client cannot discover where to get a token. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
- 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 & Reachability0
- Transport blocked by authentication: the endpoint requires auth we don't have to verify streamable-http. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Unverified
Schema Quality & AI Usability0
- Schema blocked by authentication: the endpoint requires auth we don't have to read it. See how to fix → Unverified
Stability & Change Management0
- Stability not yet verified: not enough scan history yet (needs a 30-day window).Unverified
Tool Coverage0
- Tool coverage blocked by authentication: the endpoint requires auth we don't have to read its tools.Unverified
Tool Safety0
- Tool safety blocked by authentication: the endpoint requires auth we don't have to read its tools.Unverified
Capabilities0
- Capabilities blocked by authentication: the endpoint requires auth we don't have to read them. See how to fix → Unverified
Unverified: 6 categories
Categories scored 0 because we could not verify them: authentication we do not have, an unreachable endpoint, or not enough scan history. We only credit what we can confirm. Claim this server and supply a read-only token to verify it and lift the score.
How do I install the com.lumnika/ai-crawler-readiness MCP server?
com.lumnika/ai-crawler-readiness is a hosted endpoint at https://shop.lumnika.com/ai-readiness/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 · shop.lumnika.com
claude mcp add --transport http com-lumnika-ai-crawler-readiness 'https://shop.lumnika.com/ai-readiness/mcp'
{
"mcpServers": {
"com-lumnika-ai-crawler-readiness": {
"url": "https://shop.lumnika.com/ai-readiness/mcp"
}
}
} {
"servers": {
"com-lumnika-ai-crawler-readiness": {
"type": "http",
"url": "https://shop.lumnika.com/ai-readiness/mcp"
}
}
} [mcp_servers.com-lumnika-ai-crawler-readiness] url = "https://shop.lumnika.com/ai-readiness/mcp"
{
"$schema": "https://opencode.ai/config.json",
"mcp": {
"com-lumnika-ai-crawler-readiness": {
"type": "remote",
"url": "https://shop.lumnika.com/ai-readiness/mcp",
"enabled": true
}
}
} openclaw mcp add com-lumnika-ai-crawler-readiness --url 'https://shop.lumnika.com/ai-readiness/mcp' --transport streamable-http
mcp_servers:
com-lumnika-ai-crawler-readiness:
url: "https://shop.lumnika.com/ai-readiness/mcp" {
"McpServers": {
"com-lumnika-ai-crawler-readiness": {
"Transport": "http",
"Url": "https://shop.lumnika.com/ai-readiness/mcp"
}
}
} assistant mcp add com-lumnika-ai-crawler-readiness -t streamable-http -u 'https://shop.lumnika.com/ai-readiness/mcp'
{
"mcpServers": {
"com-lumnika-ai-crawler-readiness": {
"type": "http",
"url": "https://shop.lumnika.com/ai-readiness/mcp"
}
}
} The mcpServers block is a cross-client convention. Remote transports vary, so check your client's docs.
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.
- 21 Sept 26 −30
- Endpoint reachability: reachable → behind authorisation ▼ security
- Authorization: unverified → fail ▼ security
- Tool safety: pass → unverified ▼ security
- Transport: pass → unverified ▼ security
- Stability: 0.03 → unverified ▼ security
- Capabilities: fail → unverified ▼ functional
- Tool coverage: 100 → unverified ▼ functional
- First check of Schema quality: unverified functional
- 20 Sept 26 0
- Stability: unverified → 0.03 ▲ functional
- 19 Sept 26 63
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 21 Sept 2026 · Probed https://shop.lumnika.com/ai-readiness/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=negozio.91.99.198.106.sslip.io | CN=YR2,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US | 18 Aug 2026 | 16 Nov 2026 | RSA 4096 | SHA256-RSA | 6efadfb52617af056b478580f94592c2279 |
| SANs: negozio.91.99.198.106.sslip.io, shop.lumnika.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 shop.lumnika.com. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | trust_anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| com. | present | 19718 | 13 | Verified |
| lumnika.com. | absent | Unsigned (proven) parent-signed NSEC/NSEC3 proves an unsigned delegation |
Authentication Challenged, unverified
The endpoint asked for a token, but we could not retrieve and validate the RFC 9728 metadata that tells a client how to obtain one.
| Result | Challenged, unverified |
|---|---|
| Enforced | On connection |
| HTTP status | 401 |
Protected resource metadata
| Retrieved | No |
|---|---|
| Problem | no_resource_metadata |
Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →
Transports 2 probes
| Transport | URL | Outcome | Status | Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| streamable-http | https://shop.lumnika.com/ai-readiness/mcp | Auth required | 401 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://shop.lumnika.com/ai-readiness/mcp | HTTPS enforced | 301 | https://shop.lumnika.com/ai-readiness/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 →
domain_readiness ~180
Can AI assistants actually read this domain? Returns the measured readiness score, the per-crawler verdict (served / blocked in robots.txt / refused by the edge despite robots.txt allowing it), and which edge vendor answers for the host. Measured with real HTTP requests, not guessed from robots.txt alone. Google-Extended and Applebot-Extended are robots.txt tokens, not crawlers: they are flagged robotsOnly, carry no server verdict, and are excluded from every count about what the server did. Also returns `fixes`: the ordered, domain-specific list of what to change to let the blocked crawlers in, separating what is written in the site own robots.txt from what the CDN/WAF applies on top of it.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| host | string | yes | A bare domain, e.g. "wikipedia.org" (no scheme, no path). |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
edge_blocking ~144
Who is actually doing the blocking: for each CDN/WAF vendor, the share of (domain x crawler) pairs that robots.txt ALLOWS and the server refuses anyway — i.e. how much of the blocking is an infrastructure default rather than a decision the site owner made. Each vendor also comes broken down per crawler, which separates a blanket wall (same rate for every crawler) from a managed block list that names some AI user-agents and not others.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | integer | – | How many vendors to return, highest contradiction rate first (default 12). Vendors with fewer than 200 allowed pairs are left out of the table rather than reported on thin evidence. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
measure_domain ~149
Measure a domain RIGHT NOW instead of reading the archive: 9 real HTTP requests, one from a browser user-agent and one per AI crawler user-agent, plus robots.txt / llms.txt / sitemap. Use it for any site the index has not reached yet, or when the caller wants a fresh verdict after changing robots.txt or a WAF rule. Returns the same `fixes` list as domain_readiness, derived from the fresh measurement.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| force | boolean | – | Measure again even if the archive already has a verdict from the last 24 hours (default false). |
| host | string | yes | A bare domain, e.g. "wikipedia.org" (no scheme, no path). |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
recent_changes ~168
What CHANGED: the domains that recently started or stopped blocking a specific AI crawler, with the day the flip was observed and whether it happened in robots.txt or at the edge. This cannot be reconstructed after the fact from any public source — it exists only because the index made the same requests the day before and the day after. Use it to answer 'who just blocked/unblocked ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity...' or to watch one domain over time.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| days | integer | – | Look-back window in days (default 30, max 365). |
| host | string | – | Restrict to one domain, e.g. "nytimes.com" (optional). |
| limit | integer | – | How many changes to return, most recent first (default 50, max 500). |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
web_openness ~53
How much of the most-visited web is readable by AI assistants right now: the share of measured domains that block at least one AI crawler, and the served / robots-blocked / edge-blocked breakdown per crawler.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
What is the com.lumnika/ai-crawler-readiness MCP server?
com.lumnika/ai-crawler-readiness is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as com.lumnika/ai-crawler-readiness. Can AI crawlers read this site? GPTBot/ClaudeBot verdicts, robots vs edge blocking, 47k-domain index. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://shop.lumnika.com/ai-readiness/mcp).
Is the com.lumnika/ai-crawler-readiness MCP server safe to use?
com.lumnika/ai-crawler-readiness scores 33 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 com.lumnika/ai-crawler-readiness MCP server expose?
com.lumnika/ai-crawler-readiness exposes 5 tools: domain_readiness, web_openness, edge_blocking, recent_changes, measure_domain. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 694 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the com.lumnika/ai-crawler-readiness MCP server require authentication?
Yes. com.lumnika/ai-crawler-readiness asked us for credentials when we connected, so you will need to authorise it in your MCP client before it can do anything.
Is the com.lumnika/ai-crawler-readiness MCP server still maintained?
com.lumnika/ai-crawler-readiness is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 21 September 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.