3DPACK.ING — Load Planning
REMOTE · 3DPACK.ING · SCANNED SEP 21
Load planning for containers, trucks and pallets from a plain-English description; 3D plan link.
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 Security63
- The endpoint's TLS certificate is valid, in date, and uses a strong key. View diagnostics → Pass
- Authorisation not fully verified: no authorisation is required to call this server, and 1 tool(s) never declared a destructiveHint. The MCP spec treats an absent hint as destructive by default, so we cannot call this surface safe. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Unverified
- 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 Usability68
- AI-judged instruction clarity (excellent).Pass
- Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 429 tokens (~429/item across 1 items; 1 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 Management57
- Stability observed for 17 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 1 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 1 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
How do I install the 3DPACK.ING — Load Planning MCP server?
3DPACK.ING — Load Planning is a hosted endpoint at https://3dpack.ing/mcp?server=load-planning, 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 · 3dpack.ing
claude mcp add --transport http ing-3dpack-load-planning 'https://3dpack.ing/mcp?server=load-planning'
{
"mcpServers": {
"ing-3dpack-load-planning": {
"url": "https://3dpack.ing/mcp?server=load-planning"
}
}
} {
"servers": {
"ing-3dpack-load-planning": {
"type": "http",
"url": "https://3dpack.ing/mcp?server=load-planning"
}
}
} [mcp_servers.ing-3dpack-load-planning] url = "https://3dpack.ing/mcp?server=load-planning"
{
"$schema": "https://opencode.ai/config.json",
"mcp": {
"ing-3dpack-load-planning": {
"type": "remote",
"url": "https://3dpack.ing/mcp?server=load-planning",
"enabled": true
}
}
} openclaw mcp add ing-3dpack-load-planning --url 'https://3dpack.ing/mcp?server=load-planning' --transport streamable-http
mcp_servers:
ing-3dpack-load-planning:
url: "https://3dpack.ing/mcp?server=load-planning" {
"McpServers": {
"ing-3dpack-load-planning": {
"Transport": "http",
"Url": "https://3dpack.ing/mcp?server=load-planning"
}
}
} assistant mcp add ing-3dpack-load-planning -t streamable-http -u 'https://3dpack.ing/mcp?server=load-planning'
{
"mcpServers": {
"ing-3dpack-load-planning": {
"type": "http",
"url": "https://3dpack.ing/mcp?server=load-planning"
}
}
} 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 50 to 53. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 15 days of observed history at the previous scan, 16 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 18 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 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.
- 13 Sept 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.
- 11 Sept 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.
- 9 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 13 to 17. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 4 days of observed history at the previous scan, 5 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 7 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 7 to 10. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 2 days of observed history at the previous scan, 3 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 5 Sept 26 +1
- Stability: unverified → 0.03 ▲ functional
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://3dpack.ing/mcp?server=load-planning
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=3dpack.ing | CN=YR1,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US | 18 Aug 2026 | 16 Nov 2026 | RSA 2048 | SHA256-RSA | 67c345e2eb9cc2d7b6713245bb9cfe12ee0 |
| SANs: 3dpack.ing, www.3dpack.ing | ||||||
| CN=YR1,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US (CA) | CN=Root YR,O=ISRG,C=US | 3 Sept 2025 | 2 Sept 2028 | RSA 2048 | SHA256-RSA | a20253f15f2691c05dc1ce13b9bcca4e |
| 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 3dpack.ing. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | trust_anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| ing. | present | 27256 | 8 | Verified |
| 3dpack.ing. | 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 |
Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →
Transports 2 probes
| Transport | URL | Outcome | Status | Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| streamable-http | https://3dpack.ing/mcp?server=load-planning | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://3dpack.ing/mcp?server=load-planning | HTTPS enforced | 308 | https://3dpack.ing/mcp?server=load-planning |
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 →
pack_shipment Pack a shipment into containers or trucks ~429
Work out how a shipment fits into shipping containers, trucks or pallets, using a real 3D bin-packing solver. Describe the cargo in plain English -- quantities, dimensions, weights, and any constraints such as fragile, non-tiltable, max stack height or a preferred container type -- and get back which containers are needed, how full each one is, anything that did not fit, and a link to an interactive 3D load plan. Use this instead of estimating from volume. Volume arithmetic ignores stacking rules, orientation and weight limits, and overstates what fits by a wide margin on real cargo. For cargo that must not overhang -- drums, glass, anything that must stay level -- set `stability`. It is the one constraint the prompt cannot express, because it governs how the solver stacks rather than what is being shipped.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| prompt | string | yes | The shipment, in plain English. Include quantities, dimensions with units, and weights if known. Examples: "Pack 50 boxes of 60x40x30 cm into a 20ft container"; "Load 100 fragile items 80x60x40cm, ma… |
| speed | string | – | How hard the solver should look for a better arrangement. Omit to let it choose. Use 'fast' for a quick feasibility check, 'thorough' when the packing quality matters. |
| stability | integer | – | How much of a box must rest on what is underneath it, as a percentage of its own footprint. Omit for the standard rule of 75, which allows a quarter of a box to overhang and packs the most. Raise it… |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
What is the 3DPACK.ING — Load Planning MCP server?
3DPACK.ING — Load Planning is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as ing.3dpack/load-planning. Load planning for containers, trucks and pallets from a plain-English description; 3D plan link. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://3dpack.ing/mcp?server=load-planning).
Is the 3DPACK.ING — Load Planning MCP server safe to use?
3DPACK.ING — Load Planning 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 3DPACK.ING — Load Planning MCP server expose?
3DPACK.ING — Load Planning exposes 1 tool: pack_shipment. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 429 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the 3DPACK.ING — Load Planning MCP server require authentication?
No. We connected to 3DPACK.ING — Load Planning without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.
Is the 3DPACK.ING — Load Planning MCP server still maintained?
3DPACK.ING — Load Planning 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.