Skip to content
verify mcp Beta VerifyMCP is currently in beta. If you notice any issues, get in touch and we’ll put it right.

Stabledrop escrow payments

REMOTE · API.STABLEDROP.ME

Stablecoin escrow payments the buyer can dispute, with a signed receipt. Pay a wallet or an email.

0 this week 78 Trust /100

Last scanned (3 hours ago)

Scores higher than 76% of remote servers

Reachable. Last reached 5 Nov 2026.

Category Finance and Payments

Recent critical change

Authorization (29 Oct 2026). See the changelog before you install this server.

Trust breakdown (7 categories)

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 Security57
Transport & Reachability100
Schema Quality & AI Usability75
  • 100% of prompts and resources have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the item's name).Pass
  • AI-judged instruction clarity (excellent).Pass
  • Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 3707 tokens (~285/item across 13 items; 6 tools + 7 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 Management100
  • No destabilizing schema changes in the last 30 days.Pass
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
  • Structured output schemas are declared (83% 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 6 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 supported MCP spec version (2025-11-25); the latest is 2026-07-28.Pass
Changelog

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.

  • 29 Oct 26 +2
    • Authorization: unverified → fail ▼ critical
    • Tool “settle_escrow_payment” is now declared destructive security
    • Schema quality: 231 → 285 ▼ functional
    • Tool coverage: 15% → 100% ▲ functional
    • Schema quality: good → excellent functional
    • Server version: 1.0.20 → 1.0.21 functional
    • “check_escrow_payment” reworded the description of “status_url” cosmetic
    • “payment_qr” reworded the description of “payment_uri” cosmetic
    • “prepare_escrow_payment” reworded the description of “amount” cosmetic
    • “prepare_escrow_payment” reworded the description of “arbiter” cosmetic
    • “prepare_escrow_payment” reworded the description of “brand” cosmetic
    • “prepare_escrow_payment” reworded the description of “description” cosmetic
    • “prepare_escrow_payment” reworded the description of “expiry_timestamp” cosmetic
    • “prepare_escrow_payment” reworded the description of “external_id” cosmetic
    • “prepare_escrow_payment” reworded the description of “payer” cosmetic
    • “prepare_escrow_payment” reworded the description of “product_name” cosmetic
    • “prepare_escrow_payment” reworded the description of “token_symbol” cosmetic
    • “read_published_page” reworded the description of “page” cosmetic
    • “settle_escrow_payment” reworded the description of “amount” cosmetic
    • “settle_escrow_payment” reworded the description of “arbiter” cosmetic
    • “settle_escrow_payment” reworded the description of “authorization” cosmetic
    • “settle_escrow_payment” reworded the description of “brand” cosmetic
    • “settle_escrow_payment” reworded the description of “description” cosmetic
    • “settle_escrow_payment” reworded the description of “expiry_timestamp” cosmetic
    • “settle_escrow_payment” reworded the description of “external_id” cosmetic
    • “settle_escrow_payment” reworded the description of “signature” cosmetic
    • “settle_escrow_payment” reworded the description of “token_symbol” cosmetic
    • “verify_escrow_receipt” reworded the description of “payment_receipt” cosmetic
  • 22 Oct 26 0
    • The server rewrote its instructions, which are the text every model session reads security
    • Tool “prepare_escrow_payment” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • Tool “settle_escrow_payment” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
  • 20 Oct 26 0
    • Tool “prepare_escrow_payment” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
  • 17 Oct 26 +1
    • Stability: 0.97 → pass security
  • 16 Oct 26 0
    • The server rewrote its instructions, which are the text every model session reads security
    • The server changed its declared name: Escrow payments with a dispute window → Protected payments with a dispute window security
    • Tool “payment_qr” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • Tool “prepare_escrow_payment” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • Tool “read_published_page” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • Tool “settle_escrow_payment” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
  • 14 Oct 26 +1

    No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 87 to 90. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 26 days of observed history at the previous scan, 27 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.

  • 12 Oct 26 +1

    No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 80 to 83. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 24 days of observed history at the previous scan, 25 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.

  • 10 Oct 26 +1

    No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 67 to 77. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 20 days of observed history at the previous scan, 23 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.

Diagnostics

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://api.stabledrop.me/api/ap2/mcp

TLS valid

Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .

Subject Issuer Valid from Valid until Key Signature Serial
CN=api.stabledrop.me CN=YE2,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US 7 Sept 2026 6 Dec 2026 ECDSA 256 ECDSA-SHA384 601a9b62a7833736cff2ed159a82e0130b0
SANs: api.stabledrop.me
CN=YE2,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US (CA) CN=Root YE,O=ISRG,C=US 3 Sept 2025 2 Sept 2028 ECDSA 384 ECDSA-SHA384 4df3b15dd6c0784c507cd37b58e6f115
CN=Root YE,O=ISRG,C=US (CA) CN=ISRG Root X2,O=Internet Security Research Group,C=US 13 May 2026 2 Sept 2032 ECDSA 384 ECDSA-SHA384 872165fc34b6e5fba8add5b3705fb53a
CN=ISRG Root X2,O=Internet Security Research Group,C=US (CA) CN=ISRG Root X1,O=Internet Security Research Group,C=US 13 May 2026 2 Sept 2032 ECDSA 384 SHA256-RSA 6c8f1dc727c7117f7baf853ac980f9cd

Background: What to check on a remote MCP endpoint →

DNSSEC insecure

Validation of api.stabledrop.me. — Not signed

Zone DS Keys Algorithms Outcome
. trust_anchor 20326, 38696 8, 8 Verified
me. present 45352 8 Verified
stabledrop.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
Header Value
content-security-policy frame-ancestors *
x-frame-options ALLOWALL

Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →

Transports 2 probes
Transport URL Outcome Status Location
streamable-http https://api.stabledrop.me/api/ap2/mcp Verified 200
http (plaintext) http://api.stabledrop.me/api/ap2/mcp HTTPS enforced 308 https://api.stabledrop.me/api/ap2/mcp
MCP tools · 6 exposed · ~3,276 tokens

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 →

Tool Tokens
check_escrow_payment ~54

What has happened to a settled payment, from the `status_url` on its receipt.

NameTypeReqDescription
status_urlstringyesThe `status_url` on the receipt settle_escrow_payment returned, as is.

Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.

No examples provided.

payment_qr ~295

A scannable code for a payment request, so nobody retypes an address. Pass the `payment_uri` from `prepare_escrow_payment`. Returns a QR a phone wallet can scan, with the token, network, destination and amount already in it. Or pass its `share_with_payer.pay_link`, for a code that opens the payment on the site instead — what to hand someone who is being asked to pay, as the site's own requests do. ⚠️ A SEPARATE TOOL RATHER THAN PART OF `prepare`, because the two have different audiences. `prepare` answers a machine and has to stay parseable; an image in its result would make the structured fields something a client has to dig for. A person who needs the code asks for it. ⚠️ AND IT ENCODES THE URI, NOT THE BARE ADDRESS. A QR holding only an address leaves the amount and the token to be entered by hand, which is the part worth removing — a payment contract funded with the wrong figure is not the payment contract these terms derive to, and the money sits at an address nothing can deploy to.

NameTypeReqDescription
payment_uristringyesThe `payment_uri` prepare_escrow_payment returned, for a code a wallet scans; or its `share_with_payer.pay_link`, for a code that opens the payment page.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

prepare_escrow_payment ~1,631

Work out where a payment must go, before anybody signs or sends anything. `seller` and `nominal_buyer` may each be a wallet address OR AN EMAIL ADDRESS — an email is converted to the wallet that person owns, so you never need to know a wallet to use this. The parties are checked against the sanctions lists before an address is given. If any of them is listed the answer is `error: sanctioned_party` with no address, and the payment cannot be made through this service. The same answer comes back for terms whose payment contract was already refused on sanctions grounds when its money arrived: its address is not handed out again. If the check cannot be done right now the answer is `error: service_unavailable` with `retryable: true` and no address; try again shortly. Returns the payment address these terms produce, and TWO ways to fund it. Both end at the same address holding the same money; they differ only in who sends the transaction. **Transfer it yourself.** Send the tokens to the address from any wallet — a browser wallet, a hardware wallet, an exchange withdrawal. Nothing to sign for us, and no `payer` needed, because the payment contract never asks who paid: it reads its own balance. Then call `settle_escrow_payment` with no signature and we create the payment contract around what is there. **Or let us relay it.** Pass `payer` and this returns an EIP-3009 authorization for them to sign. We broadcast it and pay the gas, so **the payer needs no gas at all**. This is the only one an agent can complete unattended, and the only one that needs a key anywhere. Either way the address is the same, because it is a pure function of the terms. That is also what makes the relayed form safe: the payer signs `to` as part of the authorization, committing to every term at once — alter any of them afterwards and the address moves and the signature stops matching. `amount` is in the TOKEN's base units (1 USDC = 1000000), because that exact figure is one of the terms the addr…

NameTypeReqDescription
amountintegeryesHow much, in the token's base units: 1 USDC = 1000000, so 25 USDC is 25000000. One of the terms the payment address derives from.
arbiter––Wallet address (0x…) of who decides a dispute. Omit for the default arbiter. One of the terms the address derives from, so pass the same value to both tools.
brand––The white-label partner the payment is made under, if any: the site's `?b=` id, e.g. escrow-me. Attribution only; does not affect the address.
descriptionstring–What the payment is for, in the buyer's own words, 1 to 160 characters, e.g. 'Logo design, final files'. Shown on the dashboard; does not affect the address.
expiry_timestampintegeryesWhen the dispute window closes, as an absolute Unix time in seconds, e.g. 1764547200. 0 settles instantly with no recourse. There is no default.
external_id––Your own id for this payment, e.g. a checkout hash, so re-presenting the same purchase derives the same address. Omit and a unique one is generated; pass back the value this returns.
nominal_buyerstringyesWho may dispute and receives any refund — the PERSON, not the agent: a wallet address (0x…) OR an email address. An email is converted to that person's wallet, created for them if they have never sig…
payer––Wallet address (0x…) that will sign an EIP-3009 authorization for us to relay, gas-free. Omit when the payer transfers the tokens to the address themselves.
product_name––What is being bought, e.g. 'Blue ceramic vase'. Shown on both parties' dashboards; display only.
sellerstringyesWho gets paid: a wallet address (0x…) OR an email address. An email is converted to the wallet that person owns, created for them if they have never signed in; the same email always gives the same wa…
token_symbolstring–The token to pay in, e.g. USDC. Must be one the service supports.

Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.

No examples provided.

read_published_page ~198

Read one of the published pages, for answering questions about how any of this works. Use it rather than guessing. What the fees are, how a dispute is decided and who decides it, what a buyer is agreeing to — all of it is written down, and none of it is safe to invent. how-it-works How an protected payment works, start to finish faq Common questions about protected payments, fees, disputes and timing arbitration-policy How a dispute is decided, by whom, and on what evidence terms-of-service The terms a buyer and seller are agreeing to privacy-policy What is collected and why plugins The WordPress and Shopify integrations home What the product is and who it is for

NameTypeReqDescription
pagestringyesWhich page: how-it-works, faq, arbitration-policy, terms-of-service, privacy-policy, plugins or home.
NameTypeReqDescription
resultstringyes–

No examples provided.

settle_escrow_payment ~962

Create the payment contract around the money and return a signed receipt. `seller` and `nominal_buyer` may be wallet addresses OR EMAIL ADDRESSES, exactly as in `prepare_escrow_payment`; an email converts to the same wallet it did there. Works both ways, and which one runs is decided by whether you pass a signature: **Already transferred it yourself** — omit `authorization` and `signature`. We check the address holds the amount and build the payment contract around what is there. If the transfer has not arrived it says so, and nothing is spent finding out. **Want us to relay it** — pass the payer's `authorization` and `signature`. We broadcast it and pay the gas, so the payer needs none. This process holds no key and signs nothing; it is handed a signature and carries it. Pass the terms exactly as they were prepared. They ARE the payment contract's address, so a single altered figure moves it — and with a signature, stops matching what the payer signed. `seller` and `nominal_buyer` may be wallet addresses or email addresses, as in `prepare_escrow_payment`; an email resolves to the same wallet it did there. ⚠️ `external_id` MUST BE THE ONE `prepare_escrow_payment` RETURNED. It generates one when you leave it out, and that generated value is only knowable from its result — send a different one and this derives a different address, while the money is at the first. ⚠️ `error: sanctioned_party` IS FINAL. A party scored above 0 on the sanctions check when the money arrived (or the payment contract was refused before): the money is frozen at its address, and nothing more may be paid into it. Do not retry and do not offer to pay again. ⚠️ The receipt reports what the seller will actually RECEIVE in `token_amount`, with the platform fee named beside it. That is less than the amount authorised, and the two reconcile: token_amount + creator_fee = amount. `brand` is the white-label partner, as in `prepare_escrow_payment`: attribution only, and ignor…

NameTypeReqDescription
amountintegeryesHow much, in the token's base units: 1 USDC = 1000000, so 25 USDC is 25000000. One of the terms the payment address derives from.
arbiter––Wallet address (0x…) of who decides a dispute. Omit for the default arbiter. One of the terms the address derives from, so pass the same value to both tools.
authorization––The EIP-3009 authorization object prepare_escrow_payment returned for the payer, unchanged. Omit when the payer transferred the tokens themselves.
brand––The white-label partner the payment is made under, if any: the site's `?b=` id, e.g. escrow-me. Attribution only; does not affect the address.
descriptionstring–What the payment is for, in the buyer's own words, 1 to 160 characters, e.g. 'Logo design, final files'. Shown on the dashboard; does not affect the address.
expiry_timestampintegeryesWhen the dispute window closes, as an absolute Unix time in seconds, e.g. 1764547200. 0 settles instantly with no recourse. There is no default.
external_idstringyesThe external_id prepare_escrow_payment returned, exactly. A different id derives a different address while the money sits at the first.
nominal_buyerstringyesWho may dispute and receives any refund — the PERSON, not the agent: a wallet address (0x…) OR an email address. An email is converted to that person's wallet, created for them if they have never sig…
sellerstringyesWho gets paid: a wallet address (0x…) OR an email address. An email is converted to the wallet that person owns, created for them if they have never signed in; the same email always gives the same wa…
signature––The payer's hex signature (0x…) over that authorization. Omit together with `authorization`.
token_symbolstring–The token to pay in, e.g. USDC. Must be one the service supports.

Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.

No examples provided.

verify_escrow_receipt ~136

Check a receipt's signature against the key its issuer publishes. ⚠️ THE KEY IS FETCHED FROM THE RECEIPT'S OWN `iss`, NOT FROM WHOEVER HANDED IT OVER. Otherwise anything that can serve a receipt can also serve the key that vouches for it, and the signature stops meaning anything. Use this on receipts from anywhere, including ones this server did not produce.

NameTypeReqDescription
payment_receiptstringyesThe receipt as a compact JWS string (header.payload.signature), e.g. the `payment_receipt` settle_escrow_payment returned, or one from anywhere else.

Structured output declared, but exposes no named fields.

No examples provided.

Install

How do I install the Stabledrop escrow payments MCP server?

Stabledrop escrow payments is a hosted endpoint at https://api.stabledrop.me/api/ap2/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 · api.stabledrop.me

# add to Claude Code
claude mcp add --transport http me-stabledrop-escrow-payments 'https://api.stabledrop.me/api/ap2/mcp'
Common questions

What is the Stabledrop escrow payments MCP server?

Stabledrop escrow payments is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as me.stabledrop/escrow-payments. Stablecoin escrow payments the buyer can dispute, with a signed receipt. Pay a wallet or an email. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://api.stabledrop.me/api/ap2/mcp).

Is the Stabledrop escrow payments MCP server safe to use?

Stabledrop escrow payments 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 Stabledrop escrow payments MCP server expose?

Stabledrop escrow payments exposes 6 tools: read_published_page, prepare_escrow_payment, settle_escrow_payment, payment_qr, check_escrow_payment, verify_escrow_receipt. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 3,276 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.

Does the Stabledrop escrow payments MCP server require authentication?

No. We connected to Stabledrop escrow payments without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.

Is the Stabledrop escrow payments MCP server still maintained?

Stabledrop escrow payments 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.