io.github.ejentum/ejentum-mcp
REMOTE · API.EJENTUM.COM · 2 COMPONENTS
Reasoning, code, anti-deception, memory harness MCP tools. Stdio or HTTPS api.ejentum.com/mcp
Available components
Last scanned (23 hours ago)
Scores higher than 57% of remote servers
Reachable. Last reached 4 Nov 2026.
Category AI and Machine Learning
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 Security60
- 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 4 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 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 is configured correctly; the domain's records validate against the full chain to the root. View diagnostics → Pass
Transport & Reachability100
- Verified streamable-http transport via a live MCP handshake. View diagnostics → Pass
Schema Quality & AI Usability71
- AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
- Tool/resource definitions use about 350 tokens (~87/item across 4 items; 4 tools + 0 resources), lean.Pass
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management77
- Stability observed for 23 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 Safety75
- No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
- 0 of 1 tool(s) whose name or description implies an irreversible operation declare an MCP destructiveHint annotation; "ejentum_fts_search" implies "execute" and declares no destructiveHint at all, which the MCP spec reads as destructive by default. See how to fix → Fail
- An AI judge read all 4 captured unit(s) of tool text and found none that tries to manipulate the model reading it.Pass
Capabilities20
- Spec-recency check failed: implements MCP spec 2024-11-05; the latest is 2026-07-28. See how to fix → Fail
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 73 to 77. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 22 days of observed history at the previous scan, 23 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 2 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 67 to 70. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 20 days of observed history at the previous scan, 21 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 31 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 60 to 63. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 18 days of observed history at the previous scan, 19 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 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.
- 26 Oct 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.
- 24 Oct 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.
- 22 Oct 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.
- 20 Oct 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.
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 4 Nov 2026 · Probed https://api.ejentum.com/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=api.ejentum.com | CN=WE1,O=Google Trust Services,C=US | 9 Oct 2026 | 7 Jan 2027 | ECDSA 256 | ECDSA-SHA256 | b7c913808903e6600e717e5f81f46a1d |
| SANs: api.ejentum.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 secure
Validation of api.ejentum.com. — Secure
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | trust_anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| com. | present | 19718 | 13 | Verified |
| ejentum.com. | present | 57017 | 13 | Verified |
| api.ejentum.com. | Verified address RRset verified with the apex keys |
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.ejentum.com/mcp | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://api.ejentum.com/mcp | HTTPS enforced | 301 | https://api.ejentum.com/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 →
ejentum_domains ~28
List the 6 invariant cognitive failure dimensions and primary failure modes mapped by Ejentum.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
ejentum_fts_search ~79
Execute sub-millisecond SQLite FTS5 full-text keyword search and BM25 ranking across the 311 deterministic reasoning abilities.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | integer | – | Maximum number of abilities to return (1-10). |
| query | string | yes | Keyword query or search terms (e.g. 'deadlock circular dependency sequence', 'database migration'). |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
ejentum_graph ~129
Traverse the 933-edge cognitive synergy graph to compose a multi-hop Cognitive Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) with Root, Prerequisite, Amplifier, and Fallback operators.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| ability_id | string | – | Optional specific root ability ID (e.g. 'CA-001', 'SI-039') to traverse directly. |
| depth | integer | – | Graph traversal depth: 1 (direct 1-hop dependencies) or 2 (recursive multi-hop chaining for autonomous agent workflows). |
| query | string | – | The complex task, system failure, or architecture question to analyze. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
ejentum_scaffold ~114
Retrieve a deterministic reasoning scaffold (Reasoning-Augmented Retrieval) to prevent hallucinations, causal inversion, and compounding multi-step failures.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| mode | string | – | Reasoning mode: 'single' (Top-1 focused invariant), 'stack' (multi-tier synthesis), or 'graph' (synergy DAG traversal). |
| query | string | yes | The user task, error trace, or diagnostic question to analyze. |
| stack_size | integer | – | Number of complementary cognitive dimensions to stack (1-4). |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the io.github.ejentum/ejentum-mcp server?
io.github.ejentum/ejentum-mcp is a hosted endpoint at https://api.ejentum.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.ejentum.com
claude mcp add --transport http ejentum-ejentum-mcp 'https://api.ejentum.com/mcp'
What is the io.github.ejentum/ejentum-mcp server?
io.github.ejentum/ejentum-mcp is listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.ejentum/ejentum-mcp. Reasoning, code, anti-deception, memory harness MCP tools. Stdio or HTTPS api.ejentum.com/mcp. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://api.ejentum.com/mcp).
Is the io.github.ejentum/ejentum-mcp server safe to use?
io.github.ejentum/ejentum-mcp 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 io.github.ejentum/ejentum-mcp server expose?
io.github.ejentum/ejentum-mcp exposes 4 tools: ejentum_scaffold, ejentum_domains, ejentum_graph, ejentum_fts_search. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 350 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the io.github.ejentum/ejentum-mcp server require authentication?
No. We connected to io.github.ejentum/ejentum-mcp without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.
Is the io.github.ejentum/ejentum-mcp server still maintained?
io.github.ejentum/ejentum-mcp is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 4 November 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.