OneLessTool
REMOTE · ONELESSTOOL.COM
Find software subscriptions you can drop using tools you already own, with vendor-verified prices.
Available components
Last scanned (3 hours ago)
Scores higher than 69% of remote servers
Reachable. Last reached 5 Nov 2026.
Category Productivity and Notes
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 Security69
- 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 check failed: the endpoint is reachable over plaintext HTTP. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
- 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 Usability67
- AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
- Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 1138 tokens (~126/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 Management77
- Stability observed for 23 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
Tool Coverage85
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 56% of tool parameters carry a description.Partial
Tool Safety100
- No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
- We read all 9 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.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 supported MCP spec version (2025-11-25); the latest is 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 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.
- 2 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 57 to 60. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 17 days of observed history at the previous scan, 18 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 29 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 50 to 53. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 15 days of observed history at the previous scan, 16 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 27 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.
- 24 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.
- 22 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.
- 20 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 20 to 23. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 6 days of observed history at the previous scan, 7 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 5 Nov 2026 · Probed https://onelesstool.com/api/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=onelesstool.com | CN=WE1,O=Google Trust Services,C=US | 13 Oct 2026 | 11 Jan 2027 | ECDSA 256 | ECDSA-SHA256 | f18188a0a2a4a0a213b141d802bcc848 |
| SANs: onelesstool.com, *.onelesstool.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 onelesstool.com. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | trust_anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| com. | present | 19718 | 13 | Verified |
| onelesstool.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 |
| Header | Value |
|---|---|
| strict-transport-security | max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains |
| content-security-policy | default-src 'self'; script-src 'self' 'unsafe-inline' https://us.i.posthog.com https://us-assets.i.posthog.com https://static.cloudflareinsights.com; connect-src 'self' https://us.i.posthog.com https://us-assets.i.posthog.com https://cloudflareinsights.com; img-src 'self' data: blob: https:; style-src 'self' 'unsafe-inline'; font-src 'self' data:; object-src 'none'; base-uri 'self'; form-action 'self'; frame-ancestors 'none' |
| x-content-type-options | nosniff |
| x-frame-options | DENY |
| referrer-policy | strict-origin-when-cross-origin |
| permissions-policy | camera=(), microphone=(), geolocation=() |
Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →
Transports 2 probes
| Transport | URL | Outcome | Status | Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| streamable-http | https://onelesstool.com/api/mcp | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://onelesstool.com/api/mcp | Served over HTTP | 200 |
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 →
compare_solutions Compare every way to accomplish a capability ~77
For one capability (e.g. 'youtube-thumbnails', 'crm-contacts', 'workflow-automation'), compare all known tools: fit, quality scores on the dimensions that matter, required skill, cheapest qualifying plan and limitations.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| capability | string | yes | Capability slug, or a phrase like 'make thumbnails' (resolved via search) |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
estimate_savings Audit a software stack and estimate savings ~82
Audit the user's subscriptions. For each: keep, downgrade, redundant, test_replacement, review_unused or keep_critical — with the arithmetic. Savings are split into 'likely' and 'possible' and never double-counted. Costs are what the user actually pays (monthly, all seats).
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| skill | string | – | – |
| subscriptions | array | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
find_alternatives Find cheaper ways to do what a tool does ~156
For a specific product (e.g. Canva), list each capability it provides and the best alternatives — ranking tools the user ALREADY owns first at $0 extra. Pass the capabilities the user actually uses (from get_tool) for a precise answer. Includes the honest case for keeping the tool.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| capabilities | array | – | Capability slugs the user actually uses this tool for (default: its core capabilities) |
| owned_tools | array | – | Tools the user already pays for, by name or slug, e.g. ["ChatGPT Plus", "google-workspace"] |
| team_size | integer | – | People who need access (affects per-seat costs) |
| tool | string | yes | The tool the user is considering dropping |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
find_workflows Find replacement workflows ~80
Find practical, step-by-step workflows that replace a paid tool or accomplish an outcome with tools the user already owns. Filter by tool being replaced, capability, or free-text query.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| capability | string | – | – |
| limit | integer | – | – |
| query | string | – | – |
| replaces_tool | string | – | Only workflows that replace this tool |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_pricing Get pricing metadata with verification status ~37
List plan prices for one tool or all tools, each with evidence status, verification date and source URL.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| tool | string | – | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_tool Get a software product's profile ~71
Full structured profile of a software product: plans and prices (with evidence status and verification date), capabilities with fit and limitations, honest reasons it's hard to replace, risks, related replacement workflows and sources.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| tool | string | yes | Tool name or slug, e.g. 'Canva' or 'canva' |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_workflow Get replacement instructions ~75
Full replacement guide: before/after, required tools and extra cost, setup steps, copyable prompts, templates/scripts, limitations, risks, a verification checklist to run BEFORE cancelling, and the savings methodology.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| sections | array | – | Return only these sections to save context (default: all) |
| slug | string | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
recommend_stack Recommend the cheapest practical stack ~166
Given the outcomes the user needs (free text or capability slugs) and what they already own, recommend per-capability options (owned tools at $0 first) and a minimal stack covering everything, with incremental monthly cost and warnings about skill, collaboration and data sensitivity.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| capabilities | array | – | – |
| needs_collaboration | boolean | – | – |
| owned_tools | array | – | Tools the user already pays for, by name or slug, e.g. ["ChatGPT Plus", "google-workspace"] |
| query | string | – | Outcome in plain English, e.g. 'I need 15 YouTube thumbnails a month and a simple CRM' |
| sensitive_data | boolean | – | – |
| skill | string | – | User's technical skill |
| team_size | integer | – | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
search_catalog Search software, capabilities and workflows ~108
Natural-language search across software products, capabilities (what software does) and replacement workflows. Understands synonyms, e.g. 'make thumbnails' finds YouTube thumbnail workflows. Returns ranked hits with URLs, plus the tool and capabilities the query most likely refers to.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| kinds | array | – | Restrict result types |
| limit | integer | – | Max results (default 10) |
| query | string | yes | What the user is looking for: a product name, a task, or an outcome |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the OneLessTool MCP server?
OneLessTool is a hosted endpoint at https://onelesstool.com/api/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 · onelesstool.com
claude mcp add --transport http com-onelesstool-onelesstool 'https://onelesstool.com/api/mcp'
What is the OneLessTool MCP server?
OneLessTool is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as com.onelesstool/onelesstool. Find software subscriptions you can drop using tools you already own, with vendor-verified prices. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://onelesstool.com/api/mcp).
Is the OneLessTool MCP server safe to use?
OneLessTool scores 77 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 OneLessTool MCP server expose?
OneLessTool exposes 9 tools: search_catalog, get_tool, find_alternatives, compare_solutions, find_workflows, and 4 more. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 852 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the OneLessTool MCP server require authentication?
No. We connected to OneLessTool without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.
Is the OneLessTool MCP server still maintained?
OneLessTool 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.