ReputeMap
REMOTE · API.REPUTEMAP.COM · 2 COMPONENTS · SCANNED SEP 20
Read and filter your Google Business Profile reviews, get stats, and send review requests.
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
- Authorisation is enforced on tool calls, but the challenge carries 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 & 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 654 tokens (~93/item across 7 items; 7 tools + 0 resources), lean.Pass
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management100
- No destabilizing schema changes in the last 30 days.Pass
Tool Coverage89
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 67% 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
- All 2 tool(s) whose name or description implies an irreversible operation declare an MCP destructiveHint annotation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 8 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
How do I install the ReputeMap MCP server?
ReputeMap is a hosted endpoint at https://api.reputemap.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.reputemap.com
claude mcp add --transport http com-reputemap-reputemap 'https://api.reputemap.com/mcp'
{
"mcpServers": {
"com-reputemap-reputemap": {
"url": "https://api.reputemap.com/mcp"
}
}
} {
"servers": {
"com-reputemap-reputemap": {
"type": "http",
"url": "https://api.reputemap.com/mcp"
}
}
} [mcp_servers.com-reputemap-reputemap] url = "https://api.reputemap.com/mcp"
{
"$schema": "https://opencode.ai/config.json",
"mcp": {
"com-reputemap-reputemap": {
"type": "remote",
"url": "https://api.reputemap.com/mcp",
"enabled": true
}
}
} openclaw mcp add com-reputemap-reputemap --url 'https://api.reputemap.com/mcp' --transport streamable-http
mcp_servers:
com-reputemap-reputemap:
url: "https://api.reputemap.com/mcp" {
"McpServers": {
"com-reputemap-reputemap": {
"Transport": "http",
"Url": "https://api.reputemap.com/mcp"
}
}
} assistant mcp add com-reputemap-reputemap -t streamable-http -u 'https://api.reputemap.com/mcp'
{
"mcpServers": {
"com-reputemap-reputemap": {
"type": "http",
"url": "https://api.reputemap.com/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.
- 29 Aug 26 +1
- Stability: 0.97 → pass security
- 26 Aug 26 +2
- We updated how we score, so this day's move reflects our rubric, not a change to the server See what changed → functional
- 24 Aug 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 80 to 83. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 24 days of observed history at the previous scan, 25 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 11 Aug 26 0
- We updated how we score, so this day's move reflects our rubric, not a change to the server See what changed → functional
- 10 Aug 26 0
- The server rewrote its instructions, which are the text every model session reads security
- New tool “publish_reply”, which the server declares destructive security
- Schema quality: 461 → 654 ▼ functional
- Tool coverage: 58% → 67% ▲ functional
- Server version: 1.0 → 1.1 functional
- New tool “draft_reply” functional
- 6 Aug 26 0
- Tool “send_review_request” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- Schema quality: good → excellent functional
- 31 Jul 26 0
- We updated how we score, so this day's move reflects our rubric, not a change to the server See what changed → functional
- 30 Jul 26 0
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 20 Sept 2026 · Probed https://api.reputemap.com/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=api.reputemap.com | CN=YR2,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US | 16 Aug 2026 | 14 Nov 2026 | RSA 4096 | SHA256-RSA | 5639dd1a1176c4047f3246ed75de36eb5d2 |
| SANs: api.reputemap.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 api.reputemap.com. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | trust_anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| com. | present | 19718 | 13 | Verified |
| reputemap.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 tool calls |
| HTTP status | 200 |
WWW-Authenticate challenge Bearer
BearerProtected 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://api.reputemap.com/mcp | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://api.reputemap.com/mcp | HTTPS enforced | 302 | https://api.reputemap.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 →
draft_reply ~65
Generate 2-3 reply drafts for one review using ReputeMap's tuned generator (the same one the app uses), and save the draft so it appears in the app's editor. NEVER publishes anything - drafts only.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| review_id | string | yes | UUID from list_reviews |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_review_stats ~69
Review stats per location and org totals: review counts, average rating, 1-5 star breakdown, unanswered count, and activity in the trailing window (default 30 days).
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| days | integer | – | – |
| location_id | string | – | UUID from list_locations; omit for all locations |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_usage ~26
Current month's API credit usage for this org (shared between the REST API and MCP tools).
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
list_locations ~28
List every business location this ReputeMap org manages, with ids to use in the other tools.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
list_reviews ~124
List Google reviews for the org (newest first) with the published reply text inlined. Filter by location, star-rating range, replied/unreplied, or a trailing day window.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | integer | – | – |
| location_id | string | – | UUID from list_locations; omit for all locations |
| offset | integer | – | – |
| rating_max | integer | – | – |
| rating_min | integer | – | – |
| since_days | integer | – | only reviews from the last N days |
| unanswered_only | boolean | – | true = only reviews without an owner reply |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
publish_reply ~98
PUBLISH a reply to this review's public Google profile. This is a public, customer-visible action - call it ONLY when the user has explicitly approved this exact text. If Google rejects the publish, the text is preserved in ReputeMap with a manual fallback (status 'manual_required') - words are never lost.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| review_id | string | yes | UUID from list_reviews |
| text | string | yes | the exact reply text the user approved |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
send_review_request ~132
Send ONE review-request email to a real customer, through ReputeMap's campaign engine (respects unsubscribes and the suppression list). This emails a real person - only use it when the user explicitly asks to request a review. Returns status 'sent', 'skipped' (opted out or suppressed), 'already_requested' (this location already asked this address - no second email is sent and no credit is spent) or 'failed'.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| string | yes | customer email address | |
| location_id | string | yes | UUID from list_locations |
| name | string | – | customer name (optional) |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
What is the ReputeMap MCP server?
ReputeMap is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as com.reputemap/reputemap. Read and filter your Google Business Profile reviews, get stats, and send review requests. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://api.reputemap.com/mcp).
Is the ReputeMap MCP server safe to use?
ReputeMap scores 89 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 ReputeMap MCP server expose?
ReputeMap exposes 7 tools: list_locations, list_reviews, get_review_stats, send_review_request, draft_reply, and 2 more. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 542 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the ReputeMap MCP server require authentication?
Yes. ReputeMap 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 ReputeMap MCP server still maintained?
ReputeMap is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 20 September 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.