ScraperWatch
REMOTE · SCRAPERWATCH.COM
Find and compare named scrapers using saved evidence; compare APIs, proxies and RAG extractors.
Available components
Last scanned (19 hours ago)
Scores higher than 47% of remote servers
Reachable. Last reached 22 Oct 2026.
Category Web Scraping
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 Usability68
- AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
- Tool/resource definitions use about 793 tokens (~99/item across 8 items; 8 tools + 0 resources), lean.Pass
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management13
- Stability observed for 4 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
Tool Coverage71
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 0% of tool parameters carry a description.Fail
- Structured output schemas are declared (13% 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
- We read all 8 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 9 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.
- 22 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.
- 21 Oct 26 0
- The server rewrote its instructions, which are the text every model session reads security
- Tool “compare_proxy_providers” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- Tool “compare_scrapers” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- Tool “list_websites” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- Tool “best_scraper” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- Tool “compare_rag_extractors” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- Tool “compare_scraping_apis” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- Tool “find_scrapers” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- Schema quality: 69 → 99 ▼ functional
- Schema quality: 69 → 91 ▼ functional
- Server version: 1.2.0 → 1.3.0 functional
- New tool “actor_history” functional
- New tool “compare_scrapers” functional
- 20 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.
- 19 Oct 26 0
- The server rewrote its instructions, which are the text every model session reads security
- Schema quality: 222 → 415 ▼ functional
- Tool coverage: 33% → 17% ▼ functional
- Tool coverage: 33% → 25% ▼ functional
- Schema quality: 222 → 274 ▼ functional
- Stability: unverified → 0.03 ▲ functional
- Server version: 1.1.0 → 1.2.0 functional
- Server version: 1.0.0 → 1.1.0 functional
- New tool “compare_proxy_providers” functional
- New tool “compare_rag_extractors” functional
- New tool “compare_scraping_apis” functional
- 18 Oct 26 61
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 22 Oct 2026 · Probed https://scraperwatch.com/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=scraperwatch.com | CN=YE1,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US | 18 Oct 2026 | 16 Jan 2027 | ECDSA 256 | ECDSA-SHA384 | 660ff2a390ba1715f82eb86be0f2d3c5da5 |
| SANs: scraperwatch.com | ||||||
| CN=YE1,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US (CA) | CN=Root YE,O=ISRG,C=US | 3 Sept 2025 | 2 Sept 2028 | ECDSA 384 | ECDSA-SHA384 | 5ddd70dd31f801c85c186a7a04b80afe |
| CN=Root YE,O=ISRG,C=US (CA) | CN=ISRG Root X2,O=Internet Security Research Group,C=US | 13 May 2026 | 2 Sept 2032 | ECDSA 384 | ECDSA-SHA384 | 872165fc34b6e5fba8add5b3705fb53a |
| CN=ISRG Root X2,O=Internet Security Research Group,C=US (CA) | CN=ISRG Root X1,O=Internet Security Research Group,C=US | 13 May 2026 | 2 Sept 2032 | ECDSA 384 | SHA256-RSA | 6c8f1dc727c7117f7baf853ac980f9cd |
Background: What to check on a remote MCP endpoint →
DNSSEC insecure
Validation of scraperwatch.com. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | trust_anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| com. | present | 19718 | 13 | Verified |
| scraperwatch.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://scraperwatch.com/mcp | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://scraperwatch.com/mcp | HTTPS enforced | 308 | https://scraperwatch.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 →
actor_history ~92
How have one tracked actor's usage, run completion and primary event price changed by day? Uses compact official Apify Store history exports; dates are snapshot filenames, not verified per-actor observation times. days is a UTC calendar window ending today (1-365). Missing days stay absent; event rates are not total cost or necessarily per result.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| actor_id | string | yes | – |
| days | integer | – | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
best_scraper ~87
Which tracked actors lead recorded run completion, usage and qualifying price for a website? Uses the filtered official Apify Store export; data_updated and evidence give snapshot date and age. Completion candidates require 300+ runs and 20+ users; price candidates also require 95%+ completion and known result-event rates. No live tests or output-quality measure.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| site | string | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
compare_proxy_providers ~87
What captured proxy offers cover a product type and optional monthly GB? Uses research/e5/proxies.json; observed_on dates each captured offer, with observations outside the past 30 days omitted. Estimates full saved package bills only; IP offers are separate and unknown costs remain null. No live prices or performance measurements.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| monthly_gb | – | – | – |
| product_type | string | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
compare_rag_extractors ~80
How did Firecrawl, Jina Reader and DIY extraction score on saved documentation fixtures? Uses the saved RAG benchmark and hash-checked table audit. Per-vendor last_run dates are source observations; generation time is unknown. Returns text/code/table scores and latency with limitations; audit may be unavailable or stale. No live tests or comparable cost.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
compare_scrapers ~82
How do two to five exact actor IDs compare? Uses the filtered official Apify Store export; data_updated and evidence describe the saved snapshot date and age. Reports usage, eligible run completion and compatible result-event rates; unknown/excluded IDs are indistinguishable. Different targets have no winner; listed rates are not total cost.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| actor_ids | array | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
compare_scraping_apis ~71
What do saved scraping API tests report? Uses the saved API benchmark summary and frozen matched ScraperAPI/ScrapingBee report. generated_at/window_days date the aggregate only; matched evidence has its own window. Returns completion/content checks and latency with separate denominators and limitations; no current vendor requests.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
find_scrapers ~99
Which tracked scrapers have the most recorded 30-day users for a website? Uses the filtered official Apify Store export; data_updated is the saved snapshot timestamp, with age/status in evidence. Returns usage, run completion and billing fields, not live tests. min_success_rate: zero includes unknown rates; positive thresholds require known rates.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | integer | – | – |
| min_success_rate | number | – | – |
| site | string | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
list_websites ~71
Which websites are in the filtered scraper export, and how many actors and summed 30-day users does each have? Uses saved official Apify Store statistics from latest.json. Counts reflect that snapshot, not live coverage; this response has no date field. Summed actor users are not deduplicated across actors.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | array | yes | – |
No examples provided.
How do I install the ScraperWatch MCP server?
ScraperWatch is a hosted endpoint at https://scraperwatch.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 · scraperwatch.com
claude mcp add --transport http com-scraperwatch-scraperwatch 'https://scraperwatch.com/mcp'
What is the ScraperWatch MCP server?
ScraperWatch is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as com.scraperwatch/scraperwatch. Find and compare named scrapers using saved evidence; compare APIs, proxies and RAG extractors. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://scraperwatch.com/mcp).
Is the ScraperWatch MCP server safe to use?
ScraperWatch scores 63 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 ScraperWatch MCP server expose?
ScraperWatch exposes 8 tools: find_scrapers, compare_scrapers, best_scraper, compare_scraping_apis, compare_rag_extractors, and 3 more. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 669 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the ScraperWatch MCP server require authentication?
No. We connected to ScraperWatch without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.
Is the ScraperWatch MCP server still maintained?
ScraperWatch is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 22 October 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.