gricker.eu: European alternatives
REMOTE · GRICKER.EU
European and open-source alternatives to mainstream software, judged by the current owner's HQ.
Available components
Last scanned (5 hours ago)
Scores higher than 60% of remote servers
Reachable. Last reached 5 Nov 2026.
Category Search and Retrieval
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 Security80
- 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
- The HSTS (Strict-Transport-Security) header is present. View diagnostics → Pass
- 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 Usability69
- AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
- Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 736 tokens (~122/item across 6 items; 6 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 Management7
- Stability observed for 2 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
Tool Coverage93
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 78% 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 6 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 7 captured unit(s) of tool text and found none that tries to manipulate the model reading it.Pass
Capabilities100
- Implements a supported MCP spec version (2025-11-25); the latest is 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 0
- The server rewrote its instructions, which are the text every model session reads security
- Schema quality: pass → fail ▼ functional
- 4 Nov 26 +1
- Stability: unverified → 0.03 ▲ functional
- 3 Nov 26 72
First indexed and scored.
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://gricker.eu/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=gricker.eu | CN=WE1,O=Google Trust Services,C=US | 9 Oct 2026 | 7 Jan 2027 | ECDSA 256 | ECDSA-SHA256 | c69283d7e346eb3d0e8791f4f96cddef |
| SANs: gricker.eu, *.gricker.eu | ||||||
| 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 insecure
Validation of gricker.eu. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | Trust anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| eu. | DS published | 35926 | 8 | Verified |
| gricker.eu. | 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 |
|---|---|
| strict-transport-security | max-age=15552000; includeSubDomains |
| content-security-policy | default-src 'self';style-src 'self' 'unsafe-inline' https://fonts.googleapis.com https://www.gstatic.com https://translate.googleapis.com;font-src 'self' https://fonts.gstatic.com https://www.gstatic.com;script-src 'self' 'unsafe-inline' 'unsafe-eval' https://challenges.cloudflare.com https://translate.google.com https://translate.googleapis.com https://translate-pa.googleapis.com https://www.gstatic.com https://www.google.com https://static.cloudflareinsights.com;frame-src 'self' https://challenges.cloudflare.com https://translate.google.com https://www.google.com;img-src 'self' data: https:;connect-src 'self' https://challenges.cloudflare.com https://translate.google.com https://translate.googleapis.com https://translate-pa.googleapis.com https://www.google.com https://cloudflareinsights.com https://*.cloudflareinsights.com;base-uri 'self';form-action 'self';frame-ancestors 'self';object-src 'none';script-src-attr 'none';upgrade-insecure-requests |
| x-content-type-options | nosniff |
| x-frame-options | SAMEORIGIN |
| referrer-policy | no-referrer |
Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →
Transports 2 probes
| Transport | URL | Outcome | Status | Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| streamable-http | https://gricker.eu/mcp | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://gricker.eu/mcp | HTTPS enforced | 301 | https://gricker.eu/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 →
check_coverage Check many tools at once ~80
Given a list of tools someone uses, report which have European alternatives in the catalog. Much cheaper than calling find_alternatives repeatedly.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| open_source_only | boolean | – | – |
| per_tool | number | – | Alternatives to name per tool, 1-5, default 3. |
| tools | array | yes | Tool names, max 50. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
find_alternatives Find European alternatives ~128
Given a mainstream tool a business wants to move away from (e.g. "Notion", "Google Analytics", "AWS"), return European and/or open-source alternatives from the gricker.eu catalog.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| category | string | – | Restrict to one category (see list_categories). |
| country | string | – | ISO-3166 alpha-2, e.g. "DE". |
| limit | number | – | 1-25, default 5. |
| open_source_only | boolean | – | – |
| to | string | yes | The incumbent tool being replaced, e.g. "Slack". |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_tool Get one tool ~52
Full record for one catalog tool by name: description, country, sources, what it replaces.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | string | yes | Tool name or slug, e.g. "Proton Mail" or "proton-mail". |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
list_categories List categories ~21
The fixed category taxonomy with a count of published tools in each.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
search_tools Search the catalog ~93
Search European/open-source tools by keyword or by meaning. Use when the user describes a need rather than naming a tool to replace.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| category | string | – | – |
| country | string | – | ISO-3166 alpha-2. |
| limit | number | – | 1-25, default 5. |
| open_source_only | boolean | – | – |
| query | string | yes | Keywords or a description of the need. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
suggest_tool Suggest a European tool ~97
Submit a European or open-source tool missing from the catalog. It enters a human review queue — submission is not publication, and HQ evidence is required before anything is listed.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| country | string | – | ISO-3166 alpha-2 of its HQ, if known. |
| name | string | yes | Tool name. |
| url | string | yes | Homepage URL. |
| why | string | – | Why it qualifies — European HQ, what it replaces. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the gricker.eu: European alternatives MCP server?
gricker.eu: European alternatives is a hosted endpoint at https://gricker.eu/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 · gricker.eu
claude mcp add --transport http eu-gricker-european-alternatives 'https://gricker.eu/mcp'
What is the gricker.eu: European alternatives MCP server?
gricker.eu: European alternatives is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as eu.gricker/european-alternatives. European and open-source alternatives to mainstream software, judged by the current owner's HQ. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://gricker.eu/mcp).
Is the gricker.eu: European alternatives MCP server safe to use?
gricker.eu: European alternatives scores 73 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 gricker.eu: European alternatives MCP server expose?
gricker.eu: European alternatives exposes 6 tools: find_alternatives, search_tools, get_tool, list_categories, check_coverage, suggest_tool. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 471 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the gricker.eu: European alternatives MCP server require authentication?
No. We connected to gricker.eu: European alternatives without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.
Is the gricker.eu: European alternatives MCP server still maintained?
gricker.eu: European alternatives 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 gricker.eu: European alternatives MCP server?
VerifyMCP ran 13 checks on gricker.eu: European alternatives, 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.