TradeCheck Local Invoice Review
MCPB · TRADECHECK-0.2.0.MCPB
Review orders and supplier invoices locally with exact arithmetic and source-linked findings.
Available components
Last scanned (14 hours ago)
Scores higher than 75% of MCPB servers
Category Finance and Payments
How this component scores in each security and reliability category. Every signal is checked automatically from public evidence about the published package, including repeated runs of it in an isolated sandbox, and we only credit what we can confirm. How we score → Why this is hard to score →
Supply Chain Security25
- No malware scan is available for this kind of package: the supply-chain vendors we use do not cover it. This is a permanent gap in our coverage, not a finding about the package.Unverified
- Known CVEs were checked across the 3 of 3 dependencies we could resolve, so this covers what we could see, not the whole tree.Partial
- No install/post-install scripts declared.Pass
- 0 of 3 dependencies flagged as unhealthy. View diagnostics → Pass
Provenance & Transparency32
- Source repository is publicly reachable at the declared URL. View diagnostics → Pass
- Provenance check failed: no build-provenance attestation is published. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
- License check failed: no license is declared. See how to fix → Fail
- Actively maintained (last published 7 days ago).Pass
- Disclosure check failed: no security disclosure policy was found in the source repository. See how to fix → Fail
Schema Quality & AI Usability56
- 50% of prompts and resources have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the item's name).Partial
- AI-judged instruction clarity (fair).Partial
- Tool/resource definitions use about 364 tokens (~72/item across 5 items; 4 tools + 1 resources), lean.Pass
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management0
- Stability not yet verified: not enough scan history yet (needs a 30-day window).Unverified
Tool Coverage71
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 0% of tool parameters carry a description.Fail
- 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 4 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 5 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
Unverified: 1 category
A category scored 0 because we could not verify it: a data source with nothing on this package, evidence we could not reach, or a check we could not run. We only credit what we can confirm.
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.
- 14 Oct 26 +26
- Injection markers: unverified → pass ▲ security
- First check of Judged manipulation: pass security
- Stability: Stability not yet verified: not enough scan history yet (needs a 30-day window). security
- Tool coverage: unverified → 100 ▲ functional
- MCP protocol: unverified → pass ▲ functional
- Schema quality: unverified → 50 ▲ functional
- First check of Tool coverage: 0 functional
- First check of Schema quality: fail functional
- First check of Schema quality: fair functional
- First check of Destructive annotations: pass functional
- First check of Schema quality: pass functional
- First check of Tool coverage: 100 functional
- 13 Oct 26 0
- Security disclosure: unverified → fail ▼ functional
- 12 Oct 26 14
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 18 Oct 2026 · Analysed mcpb/https://github.com/f-tiger/agi-site/releases/download/fleet-mcp-registry-2026-10-10/tradecheck-0.2.0.mcpb
Provenance No attestation
The registry publishes no build provenance for this version, so there is nothing to verify.
| Result | No attestation |
|---|---|
| Ecosystem | mcpb |
| Reason | No attestation published |
Background: How many MCP packages publish verified provenance →
Dependencies 3 packages
| Packages resolved | 3 |
|---|---|
| Tree resolution | Complete |
Background: SBOMs and build attestations, explained →
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 →
tradecheck_example Get a fictional importer invoice example ~58
Return the stable fictional PO-1042 example and input contract. It contains a EUR 44.00 signed price increase and cumulative quantity 320 against 300 ordered. Use this to learn the schema; never mix sample records with buyer data.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| contract | object | yes | – |
| data | object | yes | – |
No examples provided.
tradecheck_import_tables Prepare CSV or spreadsheet rows for review ~105
Convert supplied CSV or tab-separated PO and invoice rows using explicit zero-based column mappings. Supply every header amount and source name; never infer missing tax, charges, IDs, currency or units. Returns unreviewed data with unknown prior history, not an audit. Ask the user to confirm values and provide prior invoices before reconciliation.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| invoice | object | yes | – |
| invoice_table | object | yes | – |
| po | object | yes | – |
| po_table | object | yes | – |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| data | object | yes | – |
No examples provided.
tradecheck_reconcile Review an invoice against its purchase order ~118
Compare caller-supplied normalized PO, invoice and prior history using exact decimal arithmetic. Flag price, identity, currency, quantity, duplicates and total discrepancies with caller-supplied source locators. Does not read source files or approve payment. Return summary plus a page of findings; fetch next_offset until null. Each finding carries up to 6 source locators and refs_omitted; inspect supplied source rows for omitted locators.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| data | object | yes | – |
| limit | integer | – | – |
| offset | integer | – | – |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| findings_total | integer | yes | – |
| next_offset | – | yes | – |
| report | object | yes | – |
No examples provided.
tradecheck_supplier_draft Prepare an unsent supplier clarification ~79
Recompute the document review and return an unsent English or Chinese-introduction draft for up to 20 exceptions/gaps. Does not send messages. Chinese introductions preserve English diagnostic lines for exact traceability; the host can translate them. Use reconcile pagination for all findings.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| data | object | yes | – |
| language | string | – | – |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| body | string | yes | – |
| draft_items | integer | yes | – |
| findings_total | integer | yes | – |
| sent | boolean | yes | – |
| subject | string | yes | – |
No examples provided.
How do I install the TradeCheck Local Invoice Review MCP server?
TradeCheck Local Invoice Review ships as an MCPB bundle, a single file you download and open in an MCP host that supports MCPB bundles, such as Claude Desktop. The host reads the launch command from the bundle's own manifest, so there is no command to copy. Before opening it, check the file's SHA-256 matches the one the MCP registry declares for it, f048f04b20624a2cae976e77bffc545e12a5ad91d51ff8dfbaae2d1fe3e11e11; the commands to do that are on this page. If it does not match, do not open it.
mcpb · tradecheck-0.2.0.mcpb
Download bundleCheck the download matches the SHA-256 the MCP registry declares before you open it. If it does not match, do not open the file.
SHA-256
f048f04b20624a2cae976e77bffc545e12a5ad91d51ff8dfbaae2d1fe3e11e11
macOS / Linux
echo "f048f04b20624a2cae976e77bffc545e12a5ad91d51ff8dfbaae2d1fe3e11e11 tradecheck-0.2.0.mcpb" | shasum -a 256 -c
Windows (PowerShell)
(Get-FileHash -Algorithm SHA256 .\tradecheck-0.2.0.mcpb).Hash -eq "f048f04b20624a2cae976e77bffc545e12a5ad91d51ff8dfbaae2d1fe3e11e11"
Run it in the folder you saved the bundle to, then open the file with an MCPB-capable host such as Claude Desktop.
What is the TradeCheck Local Invoice Review MCP server?
TradeCheck Local Invoice Review is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.f-tiger/tradecheck. Review orders and supplier invoices locally with exact arithmetic and source-linked findings. This page covers its MCPB bundle (https://github.com/f-tiger/agi-site/releases/download/fleet-mcp-registry-2026-10-10/tradecheck-0.2.0.mcpb).
Is the TradeCheck Local Invoice Review MCP server safe to use?
TradeCheck Local Invoice Review scores 40 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. It declares no install or post-install scripts. 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 TradeCheck Local Invoice Review MCP server expose?
TradeCheck Local Invoice Review exposes 4 tools: tradecheck_import_tables, tradecheck_example, tradecheck_reconcile, tradecheck_supplier_draft. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 360 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.