Aztec Energy
REMOTE · AZTEC.ENERGY
Dimensionnement de pompe à chaleur sur la consommation réelle, estimation des aides (France)
Available components
Last scanned (15 hours ago)
Scores higher than 81% of remote servers
Reachable. Last reached 5 Nov 2026.
Category Cloud Infrastructure
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. Nothing on it is marked destructive, but we can't show that an anonymous caller can only read: full credit needs the server to list at least one tool and every tool to be verifiably read-only. We use a best-effort check of tool names and descriptions to tell read-only tools from tools that change things, so some genuinely read-only tools may not get full credit. Names that start with a read verb (get, list, read, search and similar) and accurate readOnlyHint annotations help. Meet that to earn full credit, or require authorisation. 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 Usability74
- 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 1035 tokens (~345/item across 3 items; 3 tools + 0 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 Management63
- Stability observed for 19 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
- 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 3 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 4 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.
- 5 Nov 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.
- 3 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 53 to 57. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 16 days of observed history at the previous scan, 17 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 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.
- 29 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.
- 27 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.
- 25 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.
- 23 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 17 to 20. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 5 days of observed history at the previous scan, 6 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 21 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 10 to 13. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 3 days of observed history at the previous scan, 4 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 5 Nov 2026 · Probed https://aztec.energy/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=aztec.energy | CN=YE2,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US | 3 Oct 2026 | 1 Jan 2027 | ECDSA 256 | ECDSA-SHA384 | 5a300840d574b9d5119c660ff299c15f79b |
| SANs: aztec.energy, www.aztec.energy | ||||||
| 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 aztec.energy. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | Trust anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| energy. | DS published | 46132 | 8 | Verified |
| aztec.energy. | 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 |
Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →
Transports 2 probes
| Transport | URL | Outcome | Status | Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| streamable-http | https://aztec.energy/mcp | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://aztec.energy/mcp | HTTPS enforced | 301 | https://aztec.energy/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 →
comment_obtenir_mon_releve Comment obtenir mon relevé de consommation ~150
Explique pas à pas comment obtenir son relevé de consommation (export GRDF pour le gaz, Enedis pour l'électricité, factures pour le fioul) et comment le donner à l'assistant : c'est la donnée indispensable pour dimensionner une pompe à chaleur avec estimer_puissance_pac. Step-by-step guide to download your GRDF (gas), Enedis/Linky (electricity) or fuel-oil consumption history, needed for heat pump sizing in France. À utiliser quand la personne n'a pas son relevé, ne sait pas où le trouver ou demande comment le télécharger.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| type_chauffage | string | – | Énergie du chauffage actuel |
Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.
No examples provided.
estimer_aides Estimer les aides pour une pompe à chaleur ~243
Estime les aides nationales pour installer une pompe à chaleur air/eau en France : MaPrimeRénov' (catégorie de revenus), Coup de pouce Chauffage (CEE), TVA réduite, éco-prêt à taux zéro, avec le reste à charge si un budget est donné. Estimates French national heat pump subsidies (MaPrimeRénov', CEE energy-saving certificates, reduced VAT, zero-interest loan). Montants indicatifs fondés sur le barème en vigueur : à confirmer sur france-renov.gouv.fr ; les aides locales ne sont pas chiffrées.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| annee_construction | integer | yes | Année de construction du logement |
| budget_travaux_eur | – | – | Budget prévu pour l'installation en € (pour estimer le reste à charge) |
| chauffage_actuel | string | – | Chauffage actuel remplacé |
| code_postal | string | yes | Code postal du logement (5 chiffres) |
| nb_personnes | integer | yes | Nombre de personnes composant le foyer fiscal |
| revenu_fiscal_reference | number | yes | Revenu fiscal de référence du foyer (avis d'imposition), en € |
Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.
No examples provided.
estimer_puissance_pac Dimensionner une pompe à chaleur sur la consommation réelle ~478
Dimensionnement d'une pompe à chaleur (PAC air/eau) à partir de l'historique de consommation réel du logement : bilan thermique, déperditions, puissance nécessaire à la température de base du secteur, consommation électrique estimée de la PAC, économie annuelle et PAC adaptée de notre catalogue actuel (d'autres modèles ou marques peuvent convenir). Heat pump sizing from real energy consumption: heat loss, design-day power, estimated electricity use and yearly savings, from a GRDF or Enedis daily consumption CSV export or fuel-oil deliveries (France). Un relevé de consommation est NÉCESSAIRE : sans lui, l'outil ne donne aucun chiffre et indique comment l'obtenir (export GRDF ou Enedis, livraisons de fioul). À utiliser pour : quelle puissance de pompe à chaleur pour ma maison, remplacer une chaudière gaz, fioul ou un chauffage électrique par une PAC, estimation avant la visite d'un installateur. Estimation préliminaire : ne remplace ni la visite technique ni la note de dimensionnement de l'installateur.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| annee_construction | integer | yes | Année de construction du logement |
| code_postal | string | yes | Code postal du logement (5 chiffres) : sert à retrouver la météo locale. Exemple : 59000 |
| livraisons_fioul | – | – | Pour le fioul : au moins 3 livraisons, format JJ/MM/AAAA:litres séparées par des virgules. Exemple : 05/10/2024:900,12/02/2025:800,20/09/2025:850 |
| nb_occupants | – | – | Nombre d'occupants (pour l'eau chaude) |
| releve_consommation | – | – | Contenu texte du fichier CSV de consommation quotidienne (export GRDF pour le gaz, Enedis pour l'électricité), 12 mois ou plus. Indispensable pour gaz et électricité. |
| surface_m2 | number | yes | Surface habitable chauffée, en m² |
| temperature_consigne_c | number | – | Température intérieure souhaitée en °C |
| type_chauffage | string | – | Énergie du chauffage actuel |
| type_chauffage_electrique | string | – | Si chauffage électrique : type d'installation actuelle |
Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.
No examples provided.
How do I install the Aztec Energy MCP server?
Aztec Energy is a hosted endpoint at https://aztec.energy/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 · aztec.energy
claude mcp add --transport http energy-aztec-aztec-energy 'https://aztec.energy/mcp'
What is the Aztec Energy MCP server?
Aztec Energy is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as energy.aztec/aztec-energy. Dimensionnement de pompe à chaleur sur la consommation réelle, estimation des aides (France). This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://aztec.energy/mcp).
Is the Aztec Energy MCP server safe to use?
Aztec Energy scores 80 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 Aztec Energy MCP server expose?
Aztec Energy exposes 3 tools: estimer_puissance_pac, estimer_aides, comment_obtenir_mon_releve. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 871 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the Aztec Energy MCP server require authentication?
No. We connected to Aztec Energy without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.
Is the Aztec Energy MCP server still maintained?
Aztec Energy 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 Aztec Energy MCP server?
VerifyMCP ran 13 checks on Aztec Energy, 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.