Sanctions Screening
REMOTE · HATCHLOOP.DEV · SCANNED OCT 12
Screen a name or entity against OFAC SDN, the EU Consolidated list and the UK list.
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 Usability85
- 100% of prompts and resources have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the item's name).Pass
- AI-judged instruction clarity (excellent).Pass
- Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 1423 tokens (~109/item across 13 items; 8 tools + 5 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 Management100
- No destabilizing schema changes in the last 30 days.Pass
Tool Coverage95
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 86% 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
- 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 10 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 Sanctions Screening MCP server?
Sanctions Screening is a hosted endpoint at https://hatchloop.dev/mcp/sanctions-screening, 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 · hatchloop.dev
claude mcp add --transport http dev-hatchloop-sanctions-screening 'https://hatchloop.dev/mcp/sanctions-screening'
{
"mcpServers": {
"dev-hatchloop-sanctions-screening": {
"url": "https://hatchloop.dev/mcp/sanctions-screening"
}
}
} {
"servers": {
"dev-hatchloop-sanctions-screening": {
"type": "http",
"url": "https://hatchloop.dev/mcp/sanctions-screening"
}
}
} [mcp_servers.dev-hatchloop-sanctions-screening] url = "https://hatchloop.dev/mcp/sanctions-screening"
{
"$schema": "https://opencode.ai/config.json",
"mcp": {
"dev-hatchloop-sanctions-screening": {
"type": "remote",
"url": "https://hatchloop.dev/mcp/sanctions-screening",
"enabled": true
}
}
} openclaw mcp add dev-hatchloop-sanctions-screening --url 'https://hatchloop.dev/mcp/sanctions-screening' --transport streamable-http
mcp_servers:
dev-hatchloop-sanctions-screening:
url: "https://hatchloop.dev/mcp/sanctions-screening" {
"McpServers": {
"dev-hatchloop-sanctions-screening": {
"Transport": "http",
"Url": "https://hatchloop.dev/mcp/sanctions-screening"
}
}
} assistant mcp add dev-hatchloop-sanctions-screening -t streamable-http -u 'https://hatchloop.dev/mcp/sanctions-screening'
{
"mcpServers": {
"dev-hatchloop-sanctions-screening": {
"type": "http",
"url": "https://hatchloop.dev/mcp/sanctions-screening"
}
}
} 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.
- 10 Oct 26 0
- Server version: 0.2.15 → 0.2.16 functional
- 4 Oct 26 0
- Tool “screen_sanctions” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- The server no longer declares the “logging” capability functional
- MCP protocol: Implements a current MCP spec version (2026-07-28). functional
- MCP protocol version: 2025-11-25 → 2026-07-28 functional
- “screen_sanctions” reworded the description of “name” cosmetic
- 2 Oct 26 −2
- HSTS header: pass → fail ▼ security
- 30 Sept 26 +2
- HSTS header: fail → pass ▲ security
- 28 Sept 26 +1
- We updated how we score, so this day's move reflects our rubric, not a change to the server See what changed → functional
- 26 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 90 to 93. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 27 days of observed history at the previous scan, 28 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 25 Sept 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
- 24 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 83 to 87. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 25 days of observed history at the previous scan, 26 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
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 12 Oct 2026 · Probed https://hatchloop.dev/mcp/sanctions-screening
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=hatchloop.dev | CN=YE2,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US | 9 Sept 2026 | 8 Dec 2026 | ECDSA 256 | ECDSA-SHA384 | 585b21c0597f38a72ae9ec226ee06a39406 |
| SANs: hatchloop.dev | ||||||
| CN=YE2,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US (CA) | CN=Root YE,O=ISRG,C=US | 3 Sept 2025 | 2 Sept 2028 | ECDSA 384 | ECDSA-SHA384 | 4df3b15dd6c0784c507cd37b58e6f115 |
| 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 hatchloop.dev. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | trust_anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| dev. | present | 60074 | 8 | Verified |
| hatchloop.dev. | 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 |
| Header | Value |
|---|---|
| content-security-policy | default-src 'self' 'unsafe-inline' 'unsafe-eval' data: blob: https: |
Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →
Transports 2 probes
| Transport | URL | Outcome | Status | Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| streamable-http | https://hatchloop.dev/mcp/sanctions-screening | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://hatchloop.dev/mcp/sanctions-screening | HTTPS enforced | 308 | https://hatchloop.dev/mcp/sanctions-screening |
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 →
check_compliance ~273
Free, instant pre-flight for the compliance gate: runs the SAME TCPA/GDPR/CASL/CAN-SPAM/10DLC checks as send_message and call_business, in preview mode -- nothing is sent, nothing changes. Tells you whether a send would be permitted before you pay, and if not, names the exact rule and how to fix it. De-risks a paid send the way check_booking_link de-risks a paid booking. [free, no key]
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| channel | string | – | Delivery channel. Omit to auto-infer sms/email from recipient_id; set 'voice'… |
| content | string | yes | The actual message body you intend to send. The gate classifies the real text,… |
| country_code | string | – | ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 (e.g. 'US', 'DE', 'CA'). Auto-inferred from phone if… |
| message_type | string | – | One of transactional, marketing, reminder, follow_up, notification (any case).… |
| recipient_id | string | yes | Phone in E.164 (e.g. '+14045550100') or email address the message would go to. |
| state_code | string | – | US state code (e.g. 'CA') for state-specific rules. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_outcome ~33
Retrieve the final OutcomeReceipt for a completed operation. [free, no key]
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| operation_id | string | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_status ~36
Query the current state of any in-flight async operation by operation_id. [free, no key]
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| operation_id | string | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
map_trade_restriction ~235
Free cross-border screening of destination and parties: DOES NOT CLASSIFY THE PRODUCT: echoed back, never checked against export-control lists, so a controlled item to an unrestricted destination returns 'partial', never 'clear'. Not an export-control clearance -- classify HS/ECCN yourself. Never fabricates a tariff rate, a clear, or a restricted status. [free, no key]
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| destination_country | string | yes | ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 code for the importing country (e.g. 'IR', 'CA', 'DE').… |
| hs_code | string | – | Optional Harmonized System code (e.g. '8471.30' for laptops). If provided,… |
| origin_country | string | – | Optional ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 code for the exporting country (e.g. 'US', 'DE').… |
| parties | array | – | Optional list of party names to screen (exporter, importer, freight forwarder,… |
| product | string | yes | Product name or description, e.g. 'laptop computers', 'crude oil', 'medical… |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
preview_cost ~95
Return an expected cost estimate, latency estimate, and success-probability estimate for a proposed call before execution. Returns the exact price when it is fixed, and a min/max range when the cost depends on channel or outcome. It does not promise an accuracy percentage - check cost_range. [free, no key]
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| operation | string | yes | – |
| params | object | yes | The same request body you would pass to the operation |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
screen_sanctions ~184
Free screening of a name/entity (Latin or Arabic script) against sanctions lists: OFAC SDN (US Treasury), EU consolidated list (European Commission), UK Sanctions List (FCDO). THE UN CONSOLIDATED LIST IS NOT SCREENED -- no licence permits redistribution. Never fabricates a match or clear: check lists_screened; reason_code 'partial_screening' (never 'clear') if any source failed. [free, no key]
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| country | string | – | Optional ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 country code or country name (e.g. 'IR', 'Iran').… |
| name | string | yes | Name of the person or entity to screen, in Latin or Arabic script, e.g. 'Kim… |
| type | string | – | Optional entity type hint. 'person' for individuals, 'entity' for… |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
self_test ~54
Service health probe: runs 6 internal checks and reports how many passed. Confirms the server is up and responding - it does NOT probe each tool individually. Use to verify connectivity before production use. [free, no key]
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
verify_company_record ~182
Free, live lookup of a company official registry record. Queries the GLEIF global LEI registry (primary, 2.6 million legal entities worldwide) and SEC EDGAR (US public companies) to return the official legal name, LEI, entity status, jurisdiction, registered address, and registry authority. Never fabricates: if the company is not found in these free registries, returns an honest not_found with the sources that were queried. [free, no key]
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| country | string | – | Optional ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 country filter (e.g. US, DE, GB). Narrows GLEIF… |
| lei | string | – | Optional 20-character Legal Entity Identifier for a direct, precise lookup. |
| name | string | yes | Legal company name to look up, e.g. Apple Inc or Volkswagen AG. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
What is the Sanctions Screening MCP server?
Sanctions Screening is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as dev.hatchloop/sanctions-screening. Screen a name or entity against OFAC SDN, the EU Consolidated list and the UK list. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://hatchloop.dev/mcp/sanctions-screening).
Is the Sanctions Screening MCP server safe to use?
Sanctions Screening scores 87 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 Sanctions Screening MCP server expose?
Sanctions Screening exposes 8 tools: get_status, get_outcome, preview_cost, self_test, check_compliance, and 3 more. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 1,092 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the Sanctions Screening MCP server require authentication?
No. We connected to Sanctions Screening without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.
Is the Sanctions Screening MCP server still maintained?
Sanctions Screening is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 12 October 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.