Send Email
REMOTE · NEXT.HAL9.AI · SCANNED SEP 21
Send emails from natural language prompts.
Available components
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 Security94
- The endpoint's TLS certificate is valid, in date, and uses a strong key. View diagnostics → Pass
- Authorisation is enforced on tool calls, advertised via RFC 9728 protected-resource metadata. Discovery is public, which costs nothing: no tool can be invoked without a token. View diagnostics → Pass
- 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
- The authorisation server offers only Dynamic Client Registration (RFC 7591), which MCP 2026-07-28 deprecated in favour of Client ID Metadata Documents. View diagnostics → Partial
Transport & Reachability100
- Verified streamable-http transport via a live MCP handshake. View diagnostics → Pass
Schema Quality & AI Usability69
- AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
- Tool/resource definitions use about 70 tokens (~70/item across 1 items; 1 tools + 0 resources), lean.Pass
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management60
- Stability observed for 18 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; "chat" implies "send" 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 2 captured unit(s) of tool text and found none that tries to manipulate the model reading it.Pass
Capabilities60
- Spec-recency check failed: implements MCP spec 2025-06-18; the latest is 2026-07-28. See how to fix → Fail
How do I install the Send Email MCP server?
Send Email is a hosted endpoint at https://next.hal9.ai/mcp/mcpbuild/send-email, 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 · next.hal9.ai
claude mcp add --transport http hal9ai-send-email 'https://next.hal9.ai/mcp/mcpbuild/send-email'
{
"mcpServers": {
"hal9ai-send-email": {
"url": "https://next.hal9.ai/mcp/mcpbuild/send-email"
}
}
} {
"servers": {
"hal9ai-send-email": {
"type": "http",
"url": "https://next.hal9.ai/mcp/mcpbuild/send-email"
}
}
} [mcp_servers.hal9ai-send-email] url = "https://next.hal9.ai/mcp/mcpbuild/send-email"
{
"$schema": "https://opencode.ai/config.json",
"mcp": {
"hal9ai-send-email": {
"type": "remote",
"url": "https://next.hal9.ai/mcp/mcpbuild/send-email",
"enabled": true
}
}
} openclaw mcp add hal9ai-send-email --url 'https://next.hal9.ai/mcp/mcpbuild/send-email' --transport streamable-http
mcp_servers:
hal9ai-send-email:
url: "https://next.hal9.ai/mcp/mcpbuild/send-email" {
"McpServers": {
"hal9ai-send-email": {
"Transport": "http",
"Url": "https://next.hal9.ai/mcp/mcpbuild/send-email"
}
}
} assistant mcp add hal9ai-send-email -t streamable-http -u 'https://next.hal9.ai/mcp/mcpbuild/send-email'
{
"mcpServers": {
"hal9ai-send-email": {
"type": "http",
"url": "https://next.hal9.ai/mcp/mcpbuild/send-email"
}
}
} The mcpServers block is a cross-client convention. Remote transports vary, so check your client's docs.
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.
- 20 Sept 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.
- 17 Sept 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.
- 15 Sept 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.
- 13 Sept 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.
- 11 Sept 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.
- 9 Sept 26 +15
- Authorization: unverified → pass ▲ security
- Stability: fail → 0.20 functional
- Server version: 9 → 10 functional
- 8 Sept 26 −14
- Authorization: pass → unverified ▼ security
- Stability: 0.13 → fail ▼ security
- 7 Sept 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 21 Sept 2026 · Probed https://next.hal9.ai/mcp/mcpbuild/send-email
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=next.hal9.ai | CN=YR2,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US | 6 Aug 2026 | 4 Nov 2026 | RSA 2048 | SHA256-RSA | 6b3566d0cd98314a3aeea0b257afa85fa51 |
| SANs: next.hal9.ai | ||||||
| CN=YR2,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US (CA) | CN=Root YR,O=ISRG,C=US | 3 Sept 2025 | 2 Sept 2028 | RSA 2048 | SHA256-RSA | 4ebd24947e24d394802d84a52fd5b319 |
| CN=Root YR,O=ISRG,C=US (CA) | CN=ISRG Root X1,O=Internet Security Research Group,C=US | 13 May 2026 | 2 Sept 2032 | RSA 4096 | SHA256-RSA | f24b6d17f9d9ad7cb1c9fea78782699f |
Background: What to check on a remote MCP endpoint →
DNSSEC insecure
Validation of next.hal9.ai. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | trust_anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| ai. | present | 3799 | 8 | Verified |
| hal9.ai. | absent | Unsigned (proven) parent-signed NSEC/NSEC3 proves an unsigned delegation |
Authentication Enforced and verified
The endpoint asked for a token and published valid RFC 9728 metadata describing how to get one.
| Result | Enforced and verified |
|---|---|
| Enforced | On tool calls |
| HTTP status | 200 |
WWW-Authenticate challenge Bearer realm="hal9", resource_metadata="https://next.hal9.ai/.well-known/oauth-protected-resource/mcp/mcpbuild/send-email", scope="mcp"
Bearer realm="hal9", resource_metadata="https://next.hal9.ai/.well-known/oauth-protected-resource/mcp/mcpbuild/send-email", scope="mcp"| Header | Value |
|---|---|
| strict-transport-security | max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains |
Protected resource metadata
| Document | https://next.hal9.ai/.well-known/oauth-protected-resource/mcp/mcpbuild/send-email |
|---|---|
| Retrieved | Yes |
| Resource | https://next.hal9.ai/mcp/mcpbuild/send-email |
| Authorisation server | https://next.hal9.ai |
Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →
Transports 2 probes
| Transport | URL | Outcome | Status | Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| streamable-http | https://next.hal9.ai/mcp/mcpbuild/send-email | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://next.hal9.ai/mcp/mcpbuild/send-email | HTTPS enforced | 308 | https://next.hal9.ai/mcp/mcpbuild/send-email |
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 →
chat Send Email ~57
Send emails via Resend using natural language prompts
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| chat_id | string | – | Continue an existing conversation. Omit to start a new one; the reply includes the id. |
| message | string | yes | The message to send to the agent. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
What is the Send Email MCP server?
Send Email is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.hal9ai/send-email. Send emails from natural language prompts. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://next.hal9.ai/mcp/mcpbuild/send-email).
Is the Send Email MCP server safe to use?
Send Email scores 83 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 Send Email MCP server expose?
Send Email exposes 1 tool: chat. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 57 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the Send Email MCP server require authentication?
Yes. Send Email asked us for credentials when we connected, so you will need to authorise it in your MCP client before it can do anything.
Is the Send Email MCP server still maintained?
Send Email is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 21 September 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.