Nityaflow GST credit match
REMOTE · AEERPTXVPNBZQGLEBHYT.SUPABASE.CO
India GST credit check: matches GSTR-2B with the purchase register and signs a receipt.
Available components
Last scanned (19 hours ago)
Scores higher than 76% of remote servers
Reachable. Last reached 4 Nov 2026.
Category Finance and Payments
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. Every tool declares its destructiveHint and none is destructive, so open access doesn't expose one. 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 Usability76
- 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 777 tokens (~259/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 Management33
- Stability observed for 10 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 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 supported MCP spec version (2025-11-25); the latest is 2026-07-28.Pass
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.
- 3 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 27 to 30. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 8 days of observed history at the previous scan, 9 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 1 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 20 to 23. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 6 days of observed history at the previous scan, 7 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 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.
- 27 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 3 to 7. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 1 days of observed history at the previous scan, 2 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 26 Oct 26 +3
- The server rewrote its instructions, which are the text every model session reads security
- Tool “gst_credit_match” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- Schema quality: 218 → 259 ▼ functional
- Stability: unverified → 0.03 ▲ functional
- The server now declares the “prompts” capability functional
- First check of Schema quality: 100 functional
- New prompt “check-agent-payment” functional
- New prompt “reconcile-gst” functional
- New tool “agent_payment_check” functional
- 25 Oct 26 71
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 4 Nov 2026 · Probed https://aeerptxvpnbzqglebhyt.supabase.co/functions/v1/wf/mcp-gst
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=supabase.co | CN=WE1,O=Google Trust Services,C=US | 24 Oct 2026 | 22 Jan 2027 | ECDSA 256 | ECDSA-SHA256 | d2b50611cd88e9c50e4e2231f4d3f059 |
| SANs: supabase.co, *.supabase.co | ||||||
| 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 aeerptxvpnbzqglebhyt.supabase.co. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | trust_anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| co. | present | 7786 | 8 | Verified |
| supabase.co. | absent | 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=31536000; includeSubDomains; preload |
Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →
Transports 2 probes
| Transport | URL | Outcome | Status | Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| streamable-http | https://aeerptxvpnbzqglebhyt.supabase.co/functions/v1/wf/mcp-gst | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://aeerptxvpnbzqglebhyt.supabase.co/functions/v1/wf/mcp-gst | HTTPS enforced | 301 | https://aeerptxvpnbzqglebhyt.supabase.co/functions/v1/wf/mcp-gst |
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 →
agent_payment_check Check an AI agent's payment against the mandate and the instruction ~298
Before an AI agent pays, checks the proposed payment against the person's mandate (who allowed it, limits per payment and per period, allowed shops and UPI IDs, end date) and against what the person actually asked for (items, quantities, budget, shop). It works the total out again from the cart lines, and flags lookalike payees, extra items, too much quantity, going over a limit and repeat payments. Returns every check and a receipt signed by Nityaflow. It never pays, holds or moves money: a licensed bank or payment app does that, only after a person approves.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| action | object | yes | The payment the agent proposes: {merchant, vpa, lines: [{name, qty, unit, price}], fees, total}. |
| history | array | – | Earlier payments under this mandate: [{at, total, vpa, status: paid}]. Used for the period limit and repeat check. |
| intent | object | yes | What the person asked for: {text, items: [{name, qty, unit}], budget, merchant}. Units: kg, g, l, ml, pc, pack, dozen. |
| mandate | object | yes | The permission: {authorised_by, purpose, per_payment, per_period, period (day, week, month or 90 days), merchants: [{name, vpa, category}], approve_above, valid_from, valid_to}. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
gst_credit_match Match GSTR-2B with the purchase register ~305
India GST input tax credit check. Matches the supplier invoices in GSTR-2B against the purchase register from the books (Tally, Zoho Books, Busy, QuickBooks or any list) and sorts every invoice into: matched, amount mismatch, entered twice (duplicate bills), possible match (invoice number or GSTIN written differently), in books but not in GSTR-2B (credit at risk), in GSTR-2B but not in books. A separate checker re-derives the totals, and the result comes with a receipt signed by Nityaflow. Invoices are processed in memory and not stored. It never files or accepts anything on the GST portal.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| books | array | yes | Purchase register from the books: a list of invoices like {gstin, invoice, date, name, taxable, igst, cgst, sgst, cess, value}. Use the supplier's bill number, not the voucher number. |
| client | string | – | Client or business name, for the receipt. |
| gstr2b | – | yes | GSTR-2B: either the JSON file downloaded from the GST portal, or a list of invoices like {gstin, invoice, date, taxable, igst, cgst, sgst, cess}. |
| period | string | – | Return period, for example 2026-09. |
| tolerance | number | – | Allowed difference in rupees before amounts count as different. Default 1. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
verify_receipt Verify a Nityaflow receipt ~58
Checks that a Nityaflow receipt (from gst_credit_match or a Nityaflow workflow) was not changed and was signed by Nityaflow.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| receipt | object | yes | The receipt object, exactly as it was given. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the Nityaflow GST credit match MCP server?
Nityaflow GST credit match is a hosted endpoint at https://aeerptxvpnbzqglebhyt.supabase.co/functions/v1/wf/mcp-gst, 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 · aeerptxvpnbzqglebhyt.supabase.co
claude mcp add --transport http in-nityaflow-gst-credit-match 'https://aeerptxvpnbzqglebhyt.supabase.co/functions/v1/wf/mcp-gst'
What is the Nityaflow GST credit match MCP server?
Nityaflow GST credit match is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as in.nityaflow/gst-credit-match. India GST credit check: matches GSTR-2B with the purchase register and signs a receipt. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://aeerptxvpnbzqglebhyt.supabase.co/functions/v1/wf/mcp-gst).
Is the Nityaflow GST credit match MCP server safe to use?
Nityaflow GST credit match scores 78 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 Nityaflow GST credit match MCP server expose?
Nityaflow GST credit match exposes 3 tools: gst_credit_match, verify_receipt, agent_payment_check. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 661 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the Nityaflow GST credit match MCP server require authentication?
No. We connected to Nityaflow GST credit match without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.
Is the Nityaflow GST credit match MCP server still maintained?
Nityaflow GST credit match is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 4 November 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.