# Assurance (pypi · assurance-mcp)

Checks what an agent did NOT read. Coverage over a retrieval step or a folder. No model.

- Trust score: 75/100 (medium)
- Change this week: +4
- Registry status: active
- Liveness: live
- Owner verified: no
- Last scored: 2026-09-20

## Components

- pypi · `assurance-mcp`: 75/100 (this document), [markdown](https://verifymcp.io/servers/i-ops-hq-assurance-mcp/assurance-mcp.md), [page](https://verifymcp.io/servers/i-ops-hq-assurance-mcp/assurance-mcp)

## Channel facts

- Registry: `pypi`
- Package: `assurance-mcp`
- Version: `0.4.8`
- Transport: `stdio`

## Trust breakdown

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. Scores are 0–100 per category. Scoring method: https://verifymcp.io/docs/scoring (what has changed: https://verifymcp.io/docs/scoring/changelog)

Scored 2026-09-20.

- **Supply Chain Security**: 100/100
  - No malware found by supply-chain analysis.
  - No known CVEs affecting this package version or its production dependencies.
  - Runs setuptools.build_meta at install time, a recognised native-build step with no shell scripting around it.
  - 2 of 33 dependencies flagged as unhealthy.
- **Provenance & Transparency**: 48/100
  - Source repository is publicly reachable at the declared URL.
  - Provenance check failed: no build-provenance attestation is published.
  - Clear OSI-approved license (Apache-2.0).
  - Actively maintained (last published 0 days ago).
  - Publishes a security disclosure policy (SECURITY.md).
- **Schema Quality & AI Usability**: 68/100
  - AI-judged instruction clarity (good).
  - Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 758 tokens (~151/item across 5 items; 5 tools + 0 resources), over budget; trim descriptions and params.
  - Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples.
- **Stability & Change Management**: 50/100
  - Stability observed for 15 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.
- **Tool Coverage**: 71/100
  - 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).
  - 0% of tool parameters carry a description.
  - Structured output schemas are declared (100% of tools); any adoption earns full credit.
- **Tool Safety**: 100/100
  - No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.
  - We read all 5 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.
  - An AI judge read all 5 captured unit(s) of tool text and found none that tries to manipulate the model reading it.
- **Capabilities**: 100/100
  - Implements a current MCP spec version (2026-07-28).

## Install

### How do I install the Assurance MCP server?

Assurance runs locally as a PyPI package, launched with uvx assurance-mcp. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.

### Claude

```bash
claude mcp add i-ops-hq-assurance-mcp -- uvx assurance-mcp
```

### Cursor

```json
{
  "mcpServers": {
    "i-ops-hq-assurance-mcp": {
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": [
        "assurance-mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}
```

### VS Code

```json
{
  "servers": {
    "i-ops-hq-assurance-mcp": {
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": [
        "assurance-mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}
```

### Codex

```bash
codex mcp add i-ops-hq-assurance-mcp -- uvx assurance-mcp
```

### opencode

```json
{
  "$schema": "https://opencode.ai/config.json",
  "mcp": {
    "i-ops-hq-assurance-mcp": {
      "type": "local",
      "command": [
        "uvx",
        "assurance-mcp"
      ],
      "enabled": true
    }
  }
}
```

### OpenClaw

```bash
openclaw mcp add i-ops-hq-assurance-mcp --command uvx --arg assurance-mcp
```

### Hermes

```yaml
mcp_servers:
  i-ops-hq-assurance-mcp:
    command: "uvx"
    args: ["assurance-mcp"]
```

### Netclaw

```json
{
  "McpServers": {
    "i-ops-hq-assurance-mcp": {
      "Transport": "stdio",
      "Command": "uvx",
      "Arguments": [
        "assurance-mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}
```

### Vellum

```bash
assistant mcp add i-ops-hq-assurance-mcp -t stdio -c uvx -a assurance-mcp
```

### Other

```json
{
  "mcpServers": {
    "i-ops-hq-assurance-mcp": {
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": [
        "assurance-mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}
```

## Changelog

Every change recorded for this component, newest first. Days that predate change tracking, or that we cannot explain, say so: "we were watching and nothing happened" and "we were not watching" are different claims.

### 2026-09-20 (score 75, +1)

No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 47 to 50. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 14 days of observed history at the previous scan, 15 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.

### 2026-09-19 (score 74, 0)

- [security regression] Stability: 0.43 → unverified
- [security regression] Tool safety: pass → unverified
- [functional regression] Capabilities: pass → unverified
- [functional regression] Tool coverage: 100 → unverified
- [functional] First check of Schema quality: unverified
- [functional] Package version: 0.4.7 → 0.4.8

### 2026-09-18 (score 74, +1)

No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 40 to 43. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 12 days of observed history at the previous scan, 13 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.

### 2026-09-16 (score 73, +1)

No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 33 to 37. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 10 days of observed history at the previous scan, 11 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.

### 2026-09-15 (score 72, +1)

- [functional improvement] Security disclosure: fail → pass

### 2026-09-13 (score 71, +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.

### 2026-09-12 (score 70, +15)

- [security improvement] Malware scan: unverified → pass

### 2026-09-11 (score 55, −14)

- [security regression] Malware scan: pass → unverified
- [functional] Package version: 0.4.6 → 0.4.7

## MCP tools (5)

### `check_coverage_tool` (~66 tokens)

Check whether every month in a folder span is present.

Read-only. Names a folder and optionally a period range such as
'January 2024 to December 2025' or 'last 12 months'.

Input parameters:

- `folder` (string, required)
- `period_range`

### `check_staleness_tool` (~84 tokens)

Check whether a document's figures still match a source file the caller names.

Read-only. Does not search for a plausible match — both paths are required.
Returns UNCHECKABLE when recorded facts are missing and cannot be read.

Input parameters:

- `document` (string, required)
- `folder` (string, required)
- `recorded_facts`
- `source` (string, required)

### `list_dated_files_tool` (~41 tokens)

List which reporting periods a folder holds from dated filenames.

Read-only. Helps an agent decide what to ask next.

Input parameters:

- `folder` (string, required)

### `check_set_coverage_tool` (~263 tokens)

Check what a task required against what was actually read, over any two sets of keys.

Read-only, and touches no filesystem — the caller holds both lists. Use this when the thing you
must account for is not dated files in a folder: documents the question spans against the chunks
a retriever returned, files changed in a pull request against files reviewed, table partitions
against partitions loaded, required controls against controls with evidence, declared eval cases
against cases actually run.

\`expected` is the caller's declaration and is never inferred here. `scope` names the items for
the sentence ("documents the question spans"); `where` names where they were looked for ("the
retrieved set"); `derivation` records how the expected set was arrived at, so a reader can
disagree with the denominator rather than only with the result.

Returns the coverage record: `complete`, `read` of `required`, and each way an expectation
failed to be evidence kept separate. Anything present that was not expected is reported under
\`unexpected` and deliberately earns no credit against the denominator.

Input parameters:

- `derivation`
- `expected` (array, required)
- `found` (array, required)
- `scope`
- `where`

### `check_retrieval_coverage_tool` (~304 tokens)

Check a retrieval step: did something come back from every document the question spans?

Read-only, touches no filesystem. Use this instead of `check_set_coverage_tool` whenever the
thing you retrieved is CHUNKS, because the two sides are not the same unit.

\`retrieved_chunks` may be document ids, or the records your vector store returned — the parent
document is read from `document`, `doc`, `source`, `path` or `id`, at the top level or under
\`metadata`. Chunks are reduced to parent documents and de-duplicated: five chunks of one document
is one document covered, not five.

\**Do not diff chunk ids against a document scope.** Top-k returns k chunks and a scope holds
more, so such a record can never be complete no matter how good the retrieval was.

\`expected_documents` is YOUR declaration — a metadata filter, a graph walk, a join. Never the
retriever's own output: a denominator the retriever picks always reports that it did fine.

Returns the coverage record. Documents retrieved from OUTSIDE the declared scope appear under
\`out_of_scope`; they earn no credit and do not make the run incomplete, but on a multi-tenant
corpus they are often the more alarming line.

Input parameters:

- `derivation`
- `expected_documents` (array, required)
- `retrieved_chunks` (array, required)
- `scope`

## Diagnostics

Captured diagnostic sections: Provenance, Install scripts, Dependencies. The full working is on the page: https://verifymcp.io/servers/i-ops-hq-assurance-mcp/assurance-mcp#diagnostics

## Score history

- 2026-09-20: 75
- 2026-09-19: 74
- 2026-09-18: 74
- 2026-09-17: 73
- 2026-09-16: 73
- 2026-09-15: 72
- 2026-09-14: 71
- 2026-09-13: 71
- 2026-09-12: 70
- 2026-09-11: 55
- 2026-09-10: 69
- 2026-09-09: 67
- 2026-09-08: 67
- 2026-09-07: 67
- 2026-09-06: 67
- 2026-09-05: 67

## Common questions

### What is the Assurance MCP server?

Assurance is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.i-ops-hq/assurance-mcp. Checks what an agent did NOT read. Coverage over a retrieval step or a folder. No model. This page covers its PyPI package (assurance-mcp).

### Is the Assurance MCP server safe to use?

Assurance scores 75 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. We found no known CVEs affecting it as of 20 September 2026. 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 Assurance MCP server expose?

Assurance exposes 5 tools: check_coverage_tool, check_staleness_tool, list_dated_files_tool, check_set_coverage_tool, check_retrieval_coverage_tool. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 758 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.

### Is the Assurance MCP server still maintained?

Assurance is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 20 September 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.

### What licence is the Assurance MCP server under?

Assurance declares the Apache-2.0 licence, which is OSI-approved. That covers the source only, and says nothing about the cost of any service it calls.

## Links

- PyPI project: https://pypi.org/project/assurance-mcp/
- Socket report: https://socket.dev/pypi/package/assurance-mcp
- Repository: https://github.com/i-ops-hq/assurance
- Changelog RSS feed: https://verifymcp.io/servers/i-ops-hq-assurance-mcp/assurance-mcp.xml
- Changelog JSON feed: https://verifymcp.io/servers/i-ops-hq-assurance-mcp/assurance-mcp.json
- HTML version of this page: https://verifymcp.io/servers/i-ops-hq-assurance-mcp/assurance-mcp