Lipe Court Record
REMOTE · LIPE-API-PRODUCTION.UP.RAILWAY.APP · SCANNED SEP 20
Search page-cited evidence from the public court record in Lipe v. Lupus Superior.
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 Security74
- 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 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 Usability83
- 100% of prompts and resources have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the item's name).Pass
- AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
- Tool/resource definitions use about 635 tokens (~70/item across 9 items; 6 tools + 3 resources), lean.Pass
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management60
- Stability observed for 18 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 (100% 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 6 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.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 current MCP spec version (2026-07-28).Pass
How do I install the Lipe Court Record MCP server?
Lipe Court Record is a hosted endpoint at https://lipe-api-production.up.railway.app/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 · lipe-api-production.up.railway.app
claude mcp add --transport http dalenz50010-lipe-court-record 'https://lipe-api-production.up.railway.app/mcp'
{
"mcpServers": {
"dalenz50010-lipe-court-record": {
"url": "https://lipe-api-production.up.railway.app/mcp"
}
}
} {
"servers": {
"dalenz50010-lipe-court-record": {
"type": "http",
"url": "https://lipe-api-production.up.railway.app/mcp"
}
}
} [mcp_servers.dalenz50010-lipe-court-record] url = "https://lipe-api-production.up.railway.app/mcp"
{
"$schema": "https://opencode.ai/config.json",
"mcp": {
"dalenz50010-lipe-court-record": {
"type": "remote",
"url": "https://lipe-api-production.up.railway.app/mcp",
"enabled": true
}
}
} openclaw mcp add dalenz50010-lipe-court-record --url 'https://lipe-api-production.up.railway.app/mcp' --transport streamable-http
mcp_servers:
dalenz50010-lipe-court-record:
url: "https://lipe-api-production.up.railway.app/mcp" {
"McpServers": {
"dalenz50010-lipe-court-record": {
"Transport": "http",
"Url": "https://lipe-api-production.up.railway.app/mcp"
}
}
} assistant mcp add dalenz50010-lipe-court-record -t streamable-http -u 'https://lipe-api-production.up.railway.app/mcp'
{
"mcpServers": {
"dalenz50010-lipe-court-record": {
"type": "http",
"url": "https://lipe-api-production.up.railway.app/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.
- 20 Sept 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.
- 18 Sept 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.
- 16 Sept 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.
- 14 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 37 to 40. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 11 days of observed history at the previous scan, 12 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 12 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 30 to 33. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 9 days of observed history at the previous scan, 10 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 11 Sept 26 0
- The server rewrote its instructions, which are the text every model session reads security
- Tool “get_case_overview” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- Tool “list_case_topics” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- Tool “list_record_limitations” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- Tool “search” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- Schema quality: 56 → 70 ▼ functional
- New tool “list_cases” functional
- “get_case_overview” added an optional parameter “case” cosmetic
- “list_case_topics” added an optional parameter “case” cosmetic
- “list_record_limitations” added an optional parameter “case” cosmetic
- “search” added an optional parameter “case” cosmetic
- 10 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 23 to 27. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 7 days of observed history at the previous scan, 8 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 8 Sept 26 +1
- The server rewrote its instructions, which are the text every model session reads security
- Tool “search” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- Schema quality: 44 → 56 ▼ functional
- New tool “list_record_limitations” functional
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://lipe-api-production.up.railway.app/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=*.up.railway.app | CN=YE1,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US | 29 Jul 2026 | 27 Oct 2026 | ECDSA 256 | ECDSA-SHA384 | 6da79bb561da3efeb0e751ca21abd3999fe |
| SANs: *.up.railway.app, up.railway.app | ||||||
| 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 lipe-api-production.up.railway.app. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | trust_anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| app. | present | 23684 | 8 | Verified |
| railway.app. | 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://lipe-api-production.up.railway.app/mcp | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://lipe-api-production.up.railway.app/mcp | HTTPS enforced | 301 | https://lipe-api-production.up.railway.app/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 →
fetch ~46
Fetch one search result's exact physical PDF page, reviewed evidence, provenance, and permanent citation URL. Use the returned classification and filename/page citation in the answer.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | string | yes | – |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | string | yes | – |
| metadata | – | – | – |
| text | string | yes | – |
| title | string | yes | – |
| url | string | yes | – |
No examples provided.
get_case_overview ~57
Return a concise, reviewed orientation to one case with evidence classifications and page citations. Use for first-time users, then search and fetch before answering detailed questions. `case` is a case id from list_cases.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| case | – | – | – |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| authoritative_next_step | string | yes | – |
| case | object | yes | – |
| case_id | string | yes | – |
| last_reviewed_at | string | yes | – |
| limitations | array | yes | – |
| schema_version | string | yes | – |
| sections | array | yes | – |
| type | string | yes | – |
No examples provided.
list_case_topics ~52
List the evidence topics covered for one case and suggested questions. Use when the user asks what the connector knows or what they should investigate. `case` is a case id from list_cases.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| case | – | – | – |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| case_id | string | yes | – |
| last_reviewed_at | string | yes | – |
| limitations | array | yes | – |
| schema_version | string | yes | – |
| topics | array | yes | – |
| type | string | yes | – |
No examples provided.
list_cases ~66
List the court cases this connector holds: id, caption, cause number, court, status and the incident each concerns. Pass an id as `case` to search, get_case_overview, list_case_topics and list_record_limitations. Every page id returned by search names its case.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| cases | array | yes | – |
| how_to_use | string | yes | – |
| schema_version | string | yes | – |
| type | string | yes | – |
No examples provided.
list_record_limitations ~83
List what one case's reviewed record does NOT establish: unavailable filings, facts the evidence does not verify, review scope, and the legal status a document can and cannot prove. Call before asserting the record establishes something, and before answering a question the search results do not squarely answer. `case` is a case id from list_cases.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| case | – | – | – |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| case_id | string | yes | – |
| how_to_use | string | yes | – |
| schema_version | string | yes | – |
| sections | array | yes | – |
| type | string | yes | – |
No examples provided.
search ~114
Search the court record for case facts, testimony, positions, rulings, and jury findings. Call this for every case-specific factual question, then call fetch on relevant result IDs before answering. Each result says whether the page is in the reviewed evidence ledger and which classification it carries, so prefer reviewed pages over automatically extracted ones when both answer the question. `case` confines the search to one case id from list_cases; it is required once more than one case is held.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| case | – | – | – |
| query | string | yes | – |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| results | array | yes | – |
No examples provided.
What is the Lipe Court Record MCP server?
Lipe Court Record is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.dalenz50010/lipe-court-record. Search page-cited evidence from the public court record in Lipe v. Lupus Superior. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://lipe-api-production.up.railway.app/mcp).
Is the Lipe Court Record MCP server safe to use?
Lipe Court Record scores 79 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 Lipe Court Record MCP server expose?
Lipe Court Record exposes 6 tools: list_cases, search, fetch, get_case_overview, list_case_topics, list_record_limitations. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 418 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the Lipe Court Record MCP server require authentication?
No. We connected to Lipe Court Record without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.
Is the Lipe Court Record MCP server still maintained?
Lipe Court Record 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.