Skip to content
verify mcp Beta VerifyMCP is currently in beta. If you notice any issues, get in touch and we’ll put it right.

StockFloc Fire & Ice

REMOTE · API.STOCKFLOC.COM

Today's fire and ice stock movers and the Floc Heat Index, from the most visual stock watchlist.

+3 this week 71 Trust /100

Last scanned (12 hours ago)

Scores higher than 57% of remote servers

Reachable. Last reached 5 Nov 2026.

Category Finance and Payments

Trust breakdown (7 categories)

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 Security63
  • 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. Nothing on it is marked destructive, but we can't show that an anonymous caller can only read: full credit needs the server to list at least one tool and every tool to be verifiably read-only. We use a best-effort check of tool names and descriptions to tell read-only tools from tools that change things, so some genuinely read-only tools may not get full credit. Names that start with a read verb (get, list, read, search and similar) and accurate readOnlyHint annotations help. Meet that to earn full credit, or require authorisation. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Partial
  • HTTPS enforcement could not be verified: the plaintext port answered with HTTP 405, which proves neither a plaintext path nor enforcement. View diagnostics → Unverified
  • 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
Schema Quality & AI Usability71
  • AI-judged instruction clarity (excellent).Pass
  • Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 405 tokens (~202/item across 2 items; 2 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 Management50
  • Stability observed for 15 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 2 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
  • An AI judge read all 3 captured unit(s) of tool text and found none that tries to manipulate the model reading it.Pass
Capabilities60
  • Spec-recency check failed: implements MCP spec 2025-06-18; the latest is 2026-07-28. See how to fix → Fail
What we tested

Checks we ran (12)

  • TLS certificate
  • Authorization
  • HSTS header
  • DNSSEC
  • Transport
  • Schema quality
  • Stability
  • Tool coverage
  • Injection markers
  • Destructive annotations
  • Judged manipulation
  • MCP protocol

Checks we could not complete (1)

These are gaps on our side, not findings about this hosted endpoint. We only credit what we can confirm, so a category made up entirely of them scores 0.

  • HTTPS in Endpoint SecurityHTTPS enforcement could not be verified: the plaintext port answered with HTTP 405, which proves neither a plaintext path nor enforcement.

Does not apply to this hosted endpoint (2)

  • Supply Chain SecurityScored on package channels only. This is a hosted endpoint, so there is nothing to install or inspect.
  • Provenance & TransparencyScored on package channels only. This is a hosted endpoint, so there is nothing to install or inspect.

The score does not measure everything. What the score does not measure →

Changelog

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 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.

  • 1 Nov 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.

  • 30 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.

  • 28 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.

  • 26 Oct 26 +1

    No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 13 to 17. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 4 days of observed history at the previous scan, 5 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 7 to 10. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 2 days of observed history at the previous scan, 3 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.

  • 22 Oct 26 +1
    • Stability: unverified → 0.03 ▲ functional
  • 21 Oct 26 64

    First indexed and scored.

Diagnostics

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://api.stockfloc.com/mcp

TLS valid

Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .

Subject Issuer Valid from Valid until Key Signature Serial
CN=stockfloc.com CN=WE1,O=Google Trust Services,C=US 9 Oct 2026 7 Jan 2027 ECDSA 256 ECDSA-SHA256 e09c251570b89dda13f9497a5ca1b24a
SANs: stockfloc.com, api.stockfloc.com, *.api.stockfloc.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.stockfloc.com. — Not signed

Zone DS Keys Algorithms Outcome
. Trust anchor 20326, 38696 8, 8 Verified
com. DS published 19718 13 Verified
stockfloc.com. No DS 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.stockfloc.com/mcp Verified 200
http (plaintext) http://api.stockfloc.com/mcp Inconclusive 405
MCP tools · 2 exposed · ~263 tokens

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 →

Tool Tokens
get_hot_stocks ~141

Today's biggest US stock movers in StockFloc terms: stocks on fire (the largest gainers) and frozen (the largest losers), each with its percent change for the day. Use this when someone asks which stocks are on fire, frozen, or moving the most today. Returns up to 10 ticker symbols per side with percent change only: no prices and no quote for a specific ticker. Delayed about 15 minutes.

NameTypeReqDescription
limitinteger–How many per side (1 to 10). Default 5.
sidestring–fire = top gainers, ice = top losers, both = both lists. Default both.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

get_market_heat ~122

Today's StockFloc Floc Heat Index, a 0 to 100 daily market-breadth gauge (50 is neutral; above 50 the market ran hot, below 50 it froze), plus how many of the most-traded US stocks are on fire (up 10% or more) versus frozen (down 10% or more). Use this when someone asks how hot or cold the stock market is today, or how many stocks made big moves. US stocks only, delayed about 15 minutes; returns the index and counts, not prices.

Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

Install

How do I install the StockFloc Fire & Ice MCP server?

StockFloc Fire & Ice is a hosted endpoint at https://api.stockfloc.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.stockfloc.com

# add to Claude Code
claude mcp add --transport http com-stockfloc-fire-and-ice 'https://api.stockfloc.com/mcp'
Common questions

What is the StockFloc Fire & Ice MCP server?

StockFloc Fire & Ice is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as com.stockfloc/fire-and-ice. Today's fire and ice stock movers and the Floc Heat Index, from the most visual stock watchlist. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://api.stockfloc.com/mcp).

Is the StockFloc Fire & Ice MCP server safe to use?

StockFloc Fire & Ice scores 71 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 StockFloc Fire & Ice MCP server expose?

StockFloc Fire & Ice exposes 2 tools: get_market_heat, get_hot_stocks. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 263 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.

Does the StockFloc Fire & Ice MCP server require authentication?

No. We connected to StockFloc Fire & Ice without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.

Is the StockFloc Fire & Ice MCP server still maintained?

StockFloc Fire & Ice 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.

What did VerifyMCP test on the StockFloc Fire & Ice MCP server?

VerifyMCP ran 12 checks on StockFloc Fire & Ice, covering TLS certificate, Authorization, HSTS header, DNSSEC and 8 more. One item could not be completed, a gap on our side rather than a finding about StockFloc Fire & Ice: HTTPS. Supply Chain Security and Provenance & Transparency do not apply to a hosted endpoint, so they were not tested. The score does not measure everything, and the scoring documentation lists what it leaves out.