SMS and WhatsApp Messaging
REMOTE · HATCHLOOP.DEV
Send WhatsApp, SMS, email or voice to a business with the compliance gate enforced.
Available components
Last scanned (14 hours ago)
Scores higher than 79% of remote servers
Reachable. Last reached 5 Nov 2026.
Category Communication
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 check failed: no authorisation is required to call this server, and it exposes a tool marked destructive (send_message). See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
- 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 Usability82
- 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
- Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 1753 tokens (~116/item across 15 items; 10 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 Coverage88
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 63% 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
- All 2 tool(s) whose name or description implies an irreversible operation declare an MCP destructiveHint annotation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 12 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
Checks we ran (13)
- TLS certificate
- Authorization
- HTTPS
- HSTS header
- DNSSEC
- Transport
- Schema quality
- Stability
- Tool coverage
- Injection markers
- Destructive annotations
- Judged manipulation
- MCP protocol
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 →
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.
- 9 Oct 26 0
- Server version: 0.2.15 → 0.2.16 functional
- 6 Oct 26 +1
- Tool “send_message” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- Tool “send_transactional_confirmation” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- Server version: 0.2.13 → 0.2.15 functional
- “check_compliance” reworded the description of “message_type” cosmetic
- “send_message” reworded the description of “message_type” cosmetic
- 4 Oct 26 0
- Tool “find_business” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- Tool “verify_business” 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
- “find_business” reworded the description of “availability_window” cosmetic
- “find_business” reworded the description of “capability” cosmetic
- “find_business” reworded the description of “city” cosmetic
- “find_business” reworded the description of “price_band” cosmetic
- “find_business” reworded the description of “region” cosmetic
- “find_business” made “vertical” optional cosmetic
- 2 Oct 26 0
- HSTS header: pass → fail ▼ security
- The server rewrote its instructions, which are the text every model session reads security
- Tool “send_message” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- Tool “send_transactional_confirmation” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- 1 Oct 26 0
- Stability: 0.97 → pass security
- Tool “find_business” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- Schema quality: pass → fail ▼ functional
- “find_business” reworded the description of “capability” cosmetic
- “find_business” reworded the description of “location” cosmetic
- “find_business” reworded the description of “price_band” cosmetic
- 30 Sept 26 0
- HSTS header: fail → pass ▲ security
- 28 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
- 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
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://hatchloop.dev/mcp/sms-whatsapp-messaging
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. | DS published | 60074 | 8 | Verified |
| hatchloop.dev. | 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 |
| 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/sms-whatsapp-messaging | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://hatchloop.dev/mcp/sms-whatsapp-messaging | HTTPS enforced | 308 | https://hatchloop.dev/mcp/sms-whatsapp-messaging |
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.
find_business ~270
Find real businesses near a place, sorted by distance (nearest of those examined; see result.search). Data: OpenStreetMap (ODbL, (c) OSM contributors); phone, website, hours only when mapped. Coverage varies; community-mapped, NOT verified by us; source=openstreetmap rows cannot be booked. Answers within about 5 s: status partial (search_in_progress) means repeat the call. If OSM is down: retriable 'temporarily unavailable', never invented rows. [free, no key] [beta]
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| availability_window | object | – | Accepted but NOT APPLIED: it does not narrow results (no live calendars). The… |
| capability | string | – | Kind of business: 'dentist', 'cafe', 'plumber'. Use it or vertical. |
| city | string | – | Instead of location: a city, e.g. 'Muscat, Oman'. |
| location | object | yes | City/town or ZIP, optionally with country ('Nizwa, Oman'). Geocoded by OSM. |
| max_results | integer | – | – |
| price_band | object | – | Supply-network rows only (OpenStreetMap has no prices). |
| region | string | – | With city: a state or region. |
| vertical | string | – | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_conversation ~102
Read a two-way conversation thread you started: its state, every message exchanged, and how many replies the business has sent. [free, requires key]
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| business_number | string | – | Scopes a `reference` to one business (references are reused across businesses). |
| conversation_id | string | – | From the send_message receipt (preferred). |
| reference | string | – | The 4-digit request reference, e.g. '4821'. Requires business_number. |
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.
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.
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.
send_message ~276
Send a message on behalf of an agent's user or an SMB across WhatsApp (free during launch), SMS, email, or voice, sent immediately, no scheduling. Every send passes a non-bypassable gate: TCPA, GDPR, CASL where modeled, else the service's own opt-in default (the Gulf included). Marketing on SMS, voice, WhatsApp and non-US email without recorded opt-in is rejected (compliance_violation receipt). US marketing email follows CAN-SPAM opt-out rules. [from $0.02/call, variable, not charged while no payment rail is on] [async→get_outcome] [Not available on this deployment: SMS, Voice.]
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| business_id | string | – | Stable id for the recipient business; used for global demand shaping. |
| content | object | yes | – |
| idempotency_key | string | – | Retry key: a 24h replay returns the original receipt, not re-run or charged. |
| message_type | string | yes | 'marketing' needs recorded opt-in, except US email (CAN-SPAM opt-out rules).… |
| on_behalf_of | string | – | Who this message is FOR (your end-user's name/label). On WhatsApp this opens a… |
| preferred_channel | string | – | – |
| recipient | object | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
send_transactional_confirmation ~161
Idempotent transactional messages: OTPs, booking confirmations, payment receipts, cancellation notices. Falls back across configured channels; an unconfigured channel fails honestly rather than reporting a delivery that did not happen. [$0.02/per_call, not charged while no payment rail is on] [async→get_outcome] [Not available on this deployment: SMS.]
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| confirmation_type | string | yes | – |
| data | object | yes | Type-specific payload; e.g., {otp_code} for otp, {appointment_time, smb_name}… |
| idempotency_key | string | – | Retry key: a 24h replay returns the original receipt, not re-run or charged. |
| preferred_channel | string | – | – |
| recipient | object | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
verify_business ~78
Look up what we know about a business in our supply network: contact channels, capabilities, last verification. A DIRECTORY LOOKUP - it does not contact the business. Supply-network ids only, not osm:... ids. [free, no key] [limited]
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| capability_to_verify | string | – | – |
| smb_id | string | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the SMS and WhatsApp Messaging MCP server?
SMS and WhatsApp Messaging is a hosted endpoint at https://hatchloop.dev/mcp/sms-whatsapp-messaging, 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-sms-whatsapp-messaging 'https://hatchloop.dev/mcp/sms-whatsapp-messaging'
What is the SMS and WhatsApp Messaging MCP server?
SMS and WhatsApp Messaging is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as dev.hatchloop/sms-whatsapp-messaging. Send WhatsApp, SMS, email or voice to a business with the compliance gate enforced. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://hatchloop.dev/mcp/sms-whatsapp-messaging).
Is the SMS and WhatsApp Messaging MCP server safe to use?
SMS and WhatsApp Messaging 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 SMS and WhatsApp Messaging MCP server expose?
SMS and WhatsApp Messaging exposes 10 tools: find_business, verify_business, send_message, send_transactional_confirmation, get_status, and 5 more. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 1,378 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the SMS and WhatsApp Messaging MCP server require authentication?
No. We connected to SMS and WhatsApp Messaging without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.
Is the SMS and WhatsApp Messaging MCP server still maintained?
SMS and WhatsApp Messaging 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 SMS and WhatsApp Messaging MCP server?
VerifyMCP ran 13 checks on SMS and WhatsApp Messaging, covering TLS certificate, Authorization, HTTPS, HSTS header and 9 more. 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.