Pouch.me
REMOTE · AGENTS.POUCH.ME
Custom printed pouches, plus labels, tissue, tape and boxes (Pouch.me): specs and quote requests.
Available components
Last scanned (5 hours ago)
Scores higher than 44% of remote servers
Reachable. Last reached 5 Nov 2026.
Category E-commerce
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
- 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 enforcement could not be verified: the plaintext port answered with HTTP 405, which proves neither a plaintext path nor enforcement. View diagnostics → Unverified
- HSTS check failed: the Strict-Transport-Security header is absent. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
- 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 Usability60
- AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
- Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 972 tokens (~138/item across 7 items; 7 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 Management0
- Stability check failed: schema churn in the 9 days we've observed: 2 tool removals, 0 breaking changes, 0 auth/transport breaks, 3 additions. See how to fix → Fail
Tool Coverage89
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 63% of tool parameters carry a description.Partial
- 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 7 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 8 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.
- 3 Nov 26 +1
- Schema quality: pass → fail ▼ functional
- Tool coverage: 0% → 63% ▲ functional
- Schema quality: fair → good functional
- New tool “recommend_bag_size” functional
- 2 Nov 26 −3
- Stability: 0.17 → fail ▼ security
- Tool “inkable_options” was removed ▼ security
- Tool “inkable_price” was removed ▼ security
- The server rewrote its instructions, which are the text every model session reads security
- Schema quality: fail → pass ▲ functional
- Schema quality: good → fair functional
- Server version: 1.0.1 → 1.0.2 functional
- 1 Nov 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.
- 30 Oct 26 +1
- Schema quality: 134 → 113 ▲ functional
- New tool “bag_recommendation_questions” functional
- New tool “recommend_bag_type” functional
- 29 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.
- 28 Oct 26 0
- Stability: unverified → 0.03 ▲ functional
- 27 Oct 26 62
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 5 Nov 2026 · Probed https://agents.pouch.me/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=pouch.me | CN=WE1,O=Google Trust Services,C=US | 5 Nov 2026 | 3 Feb 2027 | ECDSA 256 | ECDSA-SHA256 | 100ae4cfb80a61ac0e35e54a2d0f68c3 |
| SANs: pouch.me, *.pouch.me | ||||||
| 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 agents.pouch.me. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | trust_anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| me. | present | 45352 | 8 | Verified |
| pouch.me. | 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 |
Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →
Transports 2 probes
| Transport | URL | Outcome | Status | Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| streamable-http | https://agents.pouch.me/mcp | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://agents.pouch.me/mcp | Inconclusive | 405 |
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 →
bag_recommendation_questions Bag recommendation questions ~28
Pouch.me: the questions (and allowed answers) for recommend_bag_type.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.
No examples provided.
get_bag_format Get one bag format ~39
Pouch.me: details for one format id from list_bag_formats (options, materials, minimum).
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| format_id | string | yes | – |
Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.
No examples provided.
how_we_work How Pouch.me works ~44
Pouch.me: what's free (design, prepress, standard US shipping), the quote -> proof -> payment steps, options, materials and what we need from the customer.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.
No examples provided.
list_bag_formats List bag formats ~30
Pouch.me: the bag formats we quote, with each format's minimum order quantity per design.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.
No examples provided.
recommend_bag_size Recommend a bag size ~297
Pouch.me: a starting bag size from the same sizing tool as pouch.me/bag-sizing and our quote form's "Size it for me". Give the product, how much goes in each bag (weight, volume or count) and the bag type (e.g. from recommend_bag_type); for solid pieces add the size of one piece. Returns the recommended outside size in inches and mm, how well it fits, and the sizing tool's own explanation. Our team confirms the final size on the written quote. To put the size on a quote request, pass sizing_reference to submit_quote_request.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| bag_size | – | – | A bag size the customer already has in mind, with units, if any. The sizing tool checks it. |
| fill_amount | string | yes | How much goes in each bag: weight, volume or count, e.g. '12 oz', '250 g', '24 cookies'. Ask the customer; don't guess. |
| format | string | – | Bag type, e.g. from recommend_bag_type. not_sure lets the sizing tool pick. Roll stock isn't sized. |
| piece_size | – | – | For solid pieces (cookies, bars, jerky): the size of one piece with units, e.g. '4 x 4 x 1 in'. |
| product | string | yes | What goes in the bag, e.g. 'whole bean coffee'. Ask the customer; don't guess. |
Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.
No examples provided.
recommend_bag_type Recommend a bag type ~71
Pouch.me: a rule-based starting suggestion for bag format and material. It doesn't size the bag or check fit; our team confirms format, size and material on the written quote. Pass answers as {question_id: choice_id} from bag_recommendation_questions.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| answers | object | yes | – |
Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.
No examples provided.
submit_quote_request Submit a quote request ~106
Pouch.me: send a quote request to our team for your user. We email your user a confirmation link first; the request reaches our team only after they confirm it themselves (don't click it for them). Our team reviews it; if it's something we can make, we reply by email with a written quote or a question about the spec. No reply time is given. Requires customer_consent=true. Returns a reference number. Does not create an order.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| request | – | yes | – |
Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.
No examples provided.
How do I install the Pouch.me MCP server?
Pouch.me is a hosted endpoint at https://agents.pouch.me/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 · agents.pouch.me
claude mcp add --transport http me-pouch-agents 'https://agents.pouch.me/mcp'
What is the Pouch.me MCP server?
Pouch.me is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as me.pouch/agents. Custom printed pouches, plus labels, tissue, tape and boxes (Pouch.me): specs and quote requests. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://agents.pouch.me/mcp).
Is the Pouch.me MCP server safe to use?
Pouch.me scores 63 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 Pouch.me MCP server expose?
Pouch.me exposes 7 tools: list_bag_formats, get_bag_format, how_we_work, bag_recommendation_questions, recommend_bag_type, and 2 more. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 615 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the Pouch.me MCP server require authentication?
No. We connected to Pouch.me without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.
Is the Pouch.me MCP server still maintained?
Pouch.me 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.