tell: buying signals with receipts
PYPI · TELL-MCP
Ask tell which accounts are in market and why, with a receipt URL behind every claim.
Available components
Last scanned (23 hours ago)
Scores higher than 89% of PyPI servers
Category CRM and Sales
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. How we score → Why this is hard to score →
Supply Chain Security100
- No malware found by supply-chain analysis.Pass
- No known CVEs affecting this package version or its production dependencies.Pass
- Runs hatchling.build at install time, a recognised build step with no custom scripting around it. View diagnostics → Pass
- 1 of 31 dependencies flagged as unhealthy. View diagnostics → Partial
Provenance & Transparency97
- Source repository is publicly reachable at the declared URL. View diagnostics → Pass
- Cryptographically verified build provenance (signed, bound to karank2512/tell-ai). View diagnostics → Pass
- Clear OSI-approved license (Apache-2.0).Pass
- Actively maintained (last published 14 days ago).Pass
- Disclosure check failed: no security disclosure policy was found in the source repository. See how to fix → Fail
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 751 tokens (~150/item across 5 items; 5 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 Management50
- Stability observed for 15 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
Tool Coverage71
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 0% of tool parameters carry a description.Fail
- Structured output schemas are declared (100% of tools); any adoption earns full credit.Pass
Tool Safety100
- No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
- We read all 5 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 6 captured unit(s) of tool text and found none that tries to manipulate the model reading it.Pass
Capabilities100
- Implements a current MCP spec version (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.
- 4 Nov 26 +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.
- 3 Nov 26 +15
- Malware scan: unverified → pass ▲ security
- 2 Nov 26 −14
- Malware scan: pass → unverified ▼ security
- 1 Nov 26 +15
- Malware scan: unverified → pass ▲ security
- 31 Oct 26 −14
- Malware scan: pass → unverified ▼ security
- 29 Oct 26 +15
- Malware scan: unverified → pass ▲ security
- 28 Oct 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.
- 26 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 17 to 20. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 5 days of observed history at the previous scan, 6 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 4 Nov 2026 · Analysed pypi/tell-mcp@0.1.0
Provenance Verified
A signed build attestation was found and verified, binding this exact artifact to the source repository it claims to come from.
| Result | Verified |
|---|---|
| Ecosystem | pypi |
| Reason | Verified |
| Discovered via | Registry attestation endpoint |
| Source repo | karank2512/tell-ai |
| Certificate issuer | https://token.actions.githubusercontent.com |
| Certificate SAN | https://github.com/karank2512/tell-ai/.github/workflows/publish-mcp.yml@refs/tags/tell-mcp-v0.1.0 |
| Rekor log index | 3334467268 |
| Predicate type | PyPI publish attestation https://docs.pypi.org/attestations/publish/v1 |
| Subject digest | sha256:58d5a92842ff2e8846eede850eb9312765d33da7d10a947e1e66378388ec51a2 |
Background: How many MCP packages publish verified provenance →
Install scripts 1 script
| Hook | Tier | Command |
|---|---|---|
| build_backend | allowlisted | hatchling.build |
Background: Why install scripts are a supply-chain risk →
Dependencies 31 packages
| Packages resolved | 31 |
|---|---|
| No linked repository | 1 |
| Tree resolution | Complete |
Background: SBOMs and build attestations, explained →
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 →
coverage ~104
What tell can see for each domain: has_board (a supported job board), has_cik (an SEC CIK for Form D filings), has_feed (news), or status 'not monitored' when tell has no data, which is the honest answer: do not guess about those. Cite the `url` of every contribution, posting or signal you mention, and call `explain` for an account before writing any outreach copy about it.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| domains | array | yes | – |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | array | yes | – |
No examples provided.
events ~152
Dated events behind an account's signals, newest first, at most 200, each with its url: the scored contributions and the counted job postings. since (YYYY-MM-DD) keeps events on or after that date; types filters by signal type (hiring_velocity, funding, leadership, launch, expansion, tech_adoption) or by kind (posting). v0 limitation: no raw event endpoint exists yet, so events tell saw but did not score are not listed. Cite the `url` of every contribution, posting or signal you mention, and call `explain` for an account before writing any outreach copy about it.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| domain | string | yes | – |
| since | – | – | – |
| types | – | – | – |
Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.
No examples provided.
explain ~106
Why an account scores what it does: every contribution with its type, decayed value, date, summary and receipt url (hiring_velocity includes the counted postings), plus why_not_higher, the signals that decayed to zero in the last 30 days. Use it before writing outreach copy. Cite the `url` of every contribution, posting or signal you mention, and call `explain` for an account before writing any outreach copy about it.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| domain | string | yes | – |
Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.
No examples provided.
in_market ~162
Accounts on a public tell watchlist that are in market now: score at least min_score (default 6.0) and a top signal within since_days (default 7) of the data date. families narrows to hiring_velocity in those role families (for example sales, engineering). Returns [{domain, name, score, heat, top_contributions[:3]}] sorted by score; heat is the 0-100 percentile within the watchlist. Cite the `url` of every contribution, posting or signal you mention, and call `explain` for an account before writing any outreach copy about it.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| families | – | – | – |
| min_score | number | – | – |
| since_days | integer | – | – |
| watchlist | string | yes | – |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | array | yes | – |
No examples provided.
watch_accounts ~125
Ask tell to start watching company domains for buying signals, as a named watchlist. v0 cannot create watchlists directly: this returns the intake form link prefilled with the domains (at most 50 per request). Give the user the link to submit; the watchlist appears after the next scheduled (nightly) job picks the request up. Cite the `url` of every contribution, posting or signal you mention, and call `explain` for an account before writing any outreach copy about it.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| domains | array | yes | – |
| watchlist | string | yes | – |
Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.
No examples provided.
How do I install the tell: buying signals with receipts MCP server?
tell: buying signals with receipts runs locally as a PyPI package, launched with uvx tell-mcp. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.
pypi · tell-mcp
claude mcp add karank2512-tell-mcp -- uvx tell-mcp
What is the tell: buying signals with receipts MCP server?
tell: buying signals with receipts is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.karank2512/tell-mcp. Ask tell which accounts are in market and why, with a receipt URL behind every claim. This page covers its PyPI package (tell-mcp).
Is the tell: buying signals with receipts MCP server safe to use?
tell: buying signals with receipts scores 86 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. We found no known CVEs affecting it as of 4 November 2026. Its build provenance is signed and verified. 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 tell: buying signals with receipts MCP server expose?
tell: buying signals with receipts exposes 5 tools: watch_accounts, in_market, explain, events, coverage. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 649 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Is the tell: buying signals with receipts MCP server still maintained?
tell: buying signals with receipts 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.
What licence is the tell: buying signals with receipts MCP server under?
tell: buying signals with receipts 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.