Eclipse Trust MCP
REMOTE · CETECH.AI
Is this bench result real? Who issued it, at what scope, anchored where? One call answers.
Available components
Last scanned (17 minutes ago)
Scores higher than 43% of remote servers
Reachable. Last reached 5 Nov 2026.
Category Security
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 Security46
- 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 5 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 check failed: the endpoint is reachable over plaintext HTTP. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
- 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 Usability65
- AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
- Tool/resource definitions use about 323 tokens (~64/item across 5 items; 5 tools + 0 resources), lean.Pass
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management30
- Stability observed for 9 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
Tool Coverage67
- 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
Tool Safety100
- No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
- We read all 5 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 5 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.
- 5 Nov 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.
- 3 Nov 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.
- 1 Nov 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.
- 30 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.
- 28 Oct 26 +1
- Stability: unverified → 0.03 ▲ functional
- 27 Oct 26 55
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 5 Nov 2026 · Probed https://cetech.ai/trust/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.2 with TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=cetech.ai | CN=YR2,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US | 26 Oct 2026 | 24 Jan 2027 | RSA 2048 | SHA256-RSA | 6e24028152e83d8fcce7f334dfa38372dbd |
| SANs: cetech.ai, www.cetech.ai | ||||||
| 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 cetech.ai. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | trust_anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| ai. | present | 1814, 3799 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| cetech.ai. | 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://cetech.ai/trust/mcp | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://cetech.ai/trust/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 →
trust_get_bench_verdict ~50
The current Verity bench verdict for a product, byte-verbatim with scope attached, plus the computed pointer block. No verdict returns typed NO_VERDICT.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| product | string | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
trust_get_validation_record ~72
Resolve an ERC-8004 Validation Registry record by validation_id, request_hash, or product. Testnet records are labelled TESTNET; mainnet lookups return typed NOT_PUBLISHED_MAINNET.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| product | string | – | – |
| request_hash | string | – | – |
| validation_id | string | – | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
trust_resolve_agent ~72
Resolve an agent by ERC-8004 agent_id, DID, or registration URL: registration summary plus a trust summary computed from the records at call time.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| agent_id | string|integer | – | – |
| did | string | – | – |
| identifier | string | – | – |
| url | string | – | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
trust_status ~44
Server health + data provenance: index build time, source recompute checks, verdict/receipt/anchor counts, mainnet vs testnet posture. Call this first to judge freshness.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
trust_verify_receipt ~85
Verify a Herald receipt hash: recomputed hash match, the record it belongs to, issuer, anchor state (ANCHORED/PENDING/FAILED/NOT_ENQUEUED) with chain + tx + proof bundle, offline proof verification, and a verify_recipe. Unknown hash returns typed NOT_FOUND.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| receipt | object | – | – |
| receipt_hash | string | – | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the Eclipse Trust MCP server?
Eclipse Trust MCP is a hosted endpoint at https://cetech.ai/trust/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 · cetech.ai
claude mcp add --transport http cyan-eclipse-technologies-llc-trust 'https://cetech.ai/trust/mcp'
What is the Eclipse Trust MCP server?
Eclipse Trust MCP is listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.CYAN-ECLIPSE-TECHNOLOGIES-LLC/trust. Is this bench result real? Who issued it, at what scope, anchored where? One call answers. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://cetech.ai/trust/mcp).
Is the Eclipse Trust MCP server safe to use?
Eclipse Trust MCP scores 60 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 Eclipse Trust MCP server expose?
Eclipse Trust MCP exposes 5 tools: trust_status, trust_verify_receipt, trust_get_bench_verdict, trust_get_validation_record, trust_resolve_agent. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 323 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the Eclipse Trust MCP server require authentication?
No. We connected to Eclipse Trust MCP without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.
Is the Eclipse Trust MCP server still maintained?
Eclipse Trust MCP 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.