EmailMCP
REMOTE · MCP.SETIP.IO
AI agent email — 23 tools free to read inbox, 28 paid to send. $9.99/mo. Token auto-provisioned.
Available components
Last scanned (9 hours ago)
Scores higher than 97% of remote servers
Reachable. Last reached 5 Nov 2026.
Category Communication
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 Security89
- The endpoint's TLS certificate is valid, in date, and uses a strong key. View diagnostics → Pass
- Authorisation is enforced on tool calls, but the challenge carries no valid RFC 9728 metadata, so a client cannot discover where to get a token. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
- 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 Usability74
- AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
- Tool/resource definitions use about 3724 tokens (~66/item across 56 items; 56 tools + 0 resources), lean.Pass
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management100
- No destabilizing schema changes in the last 30 days.Pass
Tool Coverage99
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 97% of tool parameters carry a description.Partial
Tool Safety75
- No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
- 0 of 7 tool(s) whose name or description implies an irreversible operation declare an MCP destructiveHint annotation; "send_email" 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 57 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.
- 12 Oct 26 +1
- Stability: 0.93 → pass security
- 9 Oct 26 −1
- Stability: pass → 0.90 functional
- 28 Sept 26 0
- We updated how we score, so this day's move reflects our rubric, not a change to the server See what changed → functional
- 25 Sept 26 0
- We updated how we score, so this day's move reflects our rubric, not a change to the server See what changed → functional
- 24 Sept 26 0
- Stability: 0.97 → pass security
- 22 Sept 26 0
- Stability: pass → 0.93 functional
- 12 Sept 26 0
- Authorization: unverified → fail ▼ security
- Injection markers: unverified → pass ▲ security
- Stability: unverified → pass ▲ security
- Transport: fail → pass ▲ security
- Endpoint reachability: not serving MCP → reachable ▲ functional
- Tool coverage: unverified → 100 ▲ functional
- MCP protocol: unverified → pass ▲ functional
- 5 Sept 26 0
- Endpoint reachability: reachable → not serving MCP ▼ security
- Stability: pass → unverified ▼ security
- Tool safety: pass → unverified ▼ security
- Authorization: fail → unverified ▼ security
- Transport: pass → fail ▼ security
- Capabilities: pass → unverified ▼ functional
- Tool coverage: 100 → unverified ▼ 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 5 Nov 2026 · Probed https://mcp.setip.io/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=setip.io | CN=YR2,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US | 7 Oct 2026 | 5 Jan 2027 | RSA 2048 | SHA256-RSA | 697c5ed18f46a3737147e1b39f9380321b5 |
| SANs: *.setip.io, setip.io | ||||||
| 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 mcp.setip.io. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | trust_anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| io. | present | 38690 | 8 | Verified |
| setip.io. | absent | Unsigned (proven) parent-signed NSEC/NSEC3 proves an unsigned delegation |
Authentication Challenged, unverified
The endpoint asked for a token, but we could not retrieve and validate the RFC 9728 metadata that tells a client how to obtain one.
| Result | Challenged, unverified |
|---|---|
| Enforced | On tool calls |
| HTTP status | 200 |
WWW-Authenticate challenge Bearer realm="EmailMCP MCP", error="invalid_token", error_description="Set EMAILMCP_MCP_TOKEN and configure Codex with --bearer-token-env-var EMAILMCP_MCP_TOKEN"
Bearer realm="EmailMCP MCP", error="invalid_token", error_description="Set EMAILMCP_MCP_TOKEN and configure Codex with --bearer-token-env-var EMAILMCP_MCP_TOKEN"| Header | Value |
|---|---|
| strict-transport-security | max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains |
| content-security-policy | default-src 'self';script-src 'self' 'unsafe-inline';style-src 'self' 'unsafe-inline';img-src 'self' data: https:;base-uri 'self';font-src 'self' https: data:;form-action 'self';frame-ancestors 'self';object-src 'none';script-src-attr 'none';upgrade-insecure-requests |
| x-content-type-options | nosniff |
| x-frame-options | SAMEORIGIN |
| referrer-policy | no-referrer |
Protected resource metadata
| Retrieved | No |
|---|---|
| Problem | no_resource_metadata |
Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →
Transports 2 probes
| Transport | URL | Outcome | Status | Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| streamable-http | https://mcp.setip.io/mcp | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://mcp.setip.io/mcp | HTTPS enforced | 301 | https://mcp.setip.io/mcp |
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 →
stop_smtp_receiver ~17
Stop the SMTP forward receiver server
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
test_email_config ~40
Test email configuration by sending a test email
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| test_email | string | – | Email address to send test email to (optional, defaults to from_email) |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
update_email_rule ~87
Update an existing email rule (enable/disable, change match/actions/priority)
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| actions | array | – | New actions |
| enabled | boolean | – | Enable or disable the rule |
| match | object | – | New match conditions |
| priority | number | – | New priority |
| rule_id | string | yes | Rule ID to update |
| stop | boolean | – | Stop after match |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
validate_email ~55
Validate email addresses and check deliverability
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| check_mx | boolean | – | Check MX records for domain |
| check_smtp | boolean | – | Perform SMTP validation |
| emails | array | yes | Array of email addresses to validate |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
verify_autonomous_setup ~41
Verify that autonomous email is properly configured: DNS records, DKIM, SMTP send/receive
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| domain | string | yes | Your email domain to verify |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
verify_email_setup ~86
Verify IP whitelisting and email provider configuration
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| domain | string | – | Domain to check for DNS records (required if include_dns is true) |
| include_dns | boolean | – | Include DNS record verification |
| provider | string | yes | Email provider to verify, or "all" for all configured providers |
| test_email | string | – | Optional test email address to verify delivery |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the EmailMCP MCP server?
EmailMCP is a hosted endpoint at https://mcp.setip.io/mcp, 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 · mcp.setip.io
claude mcp add --transport http io-setip-emailmcp 'https://mcp.setip.io/mcp'
What is the EmailMCP MCP server?
EmailMCP is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.setip/emailmcp. AI agent email, 23 tools free to read inbox, 28 paid to send. $9.99/mo. Token auto-provisioned. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://mcp.setip.io/mcp).
Is the EmailMCP MCP server safe to use?
EmailMCP scores 89 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 EmailMCP MCP server expose?
EmailMCP exposes 56 tools: send_email, send_template_email, validate_email, get_email_usage, verify_email_setup, and 51 more. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 3,702 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the EmailMCP MCP server require authentication?
Yes. EmailMCP 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 EmailMCP MCP server still maintained?
EmailMCP is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 5 November 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.