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.

ClevSec EU compliance tools

REMOTE · MCP.CLEVSEC.ONE

Deterministic, sourced EU compliance checks: NIS2, DORA, GDPR and the Cyber Resilience Act.

Available components

+3 this week 75 Trust /100

Last scanned (10 hours ago)

Scores higher than 64% of remote servers

Reachable. Last reached 5 Nov 2026.

Category Security

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 Security74
Transport & Reachability100
Schema Quality & AI Usability59
  • AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
  • Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 8310 tokens (~268/item across 31 items; 31 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 Management53
  • Stability observed for 16 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
Tool Coverage98
  • 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
  • 94% of tool parameters carry a description.Partial
Tool Safety100
  • No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
  • We read all 31 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
  • An AI judge read all 32 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
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.

  • 4 Nov 26 +1
    • The server rewrote its instructions, which are the text every model session reads security
    • Server version: 1.3.0 → 1.4.0 functional
    • New tool “mcp_tools_check” functional
    • New tool “mcp_tools_report” functional
  • 2 Nov 26 +1
    • The server rewrote its instructions, which are the text every model session reads security
    • Server version: 1.2.1 → 1.3.0 functional
    • New tool “agent_risk_check” functional
  • 31 Oct 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.

  • 29 Oct 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.

  • 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.

  • 24 Oct 26 +1
    • Tool “gdpr_checklist_assessment” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
  • 22 Oct 26 +1
    • Server version: 1.2.0 → 1.2.1 functional
  • 21 Oct 26 0
    • Stability: unverified → 0.03 ▲ functional
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://mcp.clevsec.one/mcp

TLS valid

Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .

Subject Issuer Valid from Valid until Key Signature Serial
CN=clevsec.one CN=WE1,O=Google Trust Services,C=US 20 Oct 2026 18 Jan 2027 ECDSA 256 ECDSA-SHA256 8a3ce9c9626f3ecd0e3d11b11293d6d3
SANs: clevsec.one, mcp.clevsec.one, *.mcp.clevsec.one
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 mcp.clevsec.one. — Not signed

Zone DS Keys Algorithms Outcome
. trust_anchor 20326, 38696 8, 8 Verified
one. present 64939 8 Verified
clevsec.one. 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://mcp.clevsec.one/mcp Verified 200
http (plaintext) http://mcp.clevsec.one/mcp HTTPS enforced 301 https://mcp.clevsec.one/mcp
MCP tools · 31 exposed · ~8,190 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
agent_risk_check ~225

Use when someone asks how risky an AI agent or assistant setup is ('is it safe to let our agent read email and send replies?', 'what are the risks of this agent?'). Call without answers to get 9 questions on what the agent can do and 11 on the controls that limit it. Call with answers to get a 0-100 residual risk score (0 = lowest), a risk level, red flags such as an exfiltration path, and the missing controls with actions and OWASP, GDPR and AI Act references. A self-assessment from the user's answers, not a scan or test of the agent.

NameTypeReqDescription
answersobject–Question id to answer. Exposure questions e1-e9: "yes" or "no". Control questions c1-c11: "yes", "partial" or "no". Example: {"e1": "yes", "e2": "yes", "e3": "yes", "c2": "no"}. Unanswered exposure q…

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

cookie_consent_check ~114

Use when someone asks whether their cookie banner or cookie consent is compliant in the EU (ePrivacy Art. 5(3) and GDPR consent rules). Call without answers to get the checklist items by area, critical ones marked. Call with yes, partial or no per item to get a score, a compliance label and the open items.

NameTypeReqDescription
answersobject–Item id to answer, e.g. {"c1": "yes", "c3": "partial"}. Unanswered items count as gaps.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

cookie_consent_fix_plan ~107

Use after cookie_consent_check when the user wants to fix their cookie consent. Returns every open item with the fix, its legal source (ePrivacy, GDPR, CJEU Planet49, EDPB) and a 30/60/90-day roadmap. Requires ClevSec Pro.

NameTypeReqDescription
answersobjectyesItem id to answer, e.g. {"c1": "yes", "c3": "partial"}. Unanswered items count as gaps.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

cra_reporting_check ~328

Use when a manufacturer of hardware or software sold in the EU learns of an actively exploited vulnerability or a security incident in its product. Applies Art. 14 of the Cyber Resilience Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/2847), in force since 11 September 2026: whether a report is due, the 24-hour, 72-hour and final report deadlines, where to report, and informing users.

NameTypeReqDescription
affects_data_or_functions_protectionboolean–Severe incident test, Art. 14(5)(a): it harms or can harm the product's ability to protect the availability, authenticity, integrity or confidentiality of sensitive or important data or functions
eventstringyesactively_exploited_vulnerability: reliable evidence that a malicious actor exploited it; severe_incident: an incident affecting the product's security
is_manufacturerboolean–Develops or manufactures the product, or has it designed or made, and markets it under its own name or trademark
malicious_codeboolean–Severe incident test, Art. 14(5)(b): it led or can lead to malicious code in the product or in users' systems
product_with_digital_elementsboolean–Software or hardware product (and its remote data processing) made available in the EU whose intended or foreseeable use includes a data connection to a device or network (Arts. 2(1), 3(1)); some pro…

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

cyber_risk_action_plan ~116

Use after cyber_risk_score when the user wants to reduce their risk. Returns every gap with a recommended action, a priority, NIST CSF 2.0 and NIS2 references and a 30/60/90-day roadmap (MFA, encryption, patching, incident response and backups first). Requires ClevSec Pro.

NameTypeReqDescription
answersobjectyesQuestion id to answer, e.g. {"q1": "yes", "q4": "partial"}. Unanswered questions score zero.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

cyber_risk_score ~122

Use for a quick view of a small organisation's cyber risk ('how secure are we?', 'what is our cyber risk score?'). Call without answers to get 15 weighted questions on access, data, systems, people, incident response and backups. Call with yes, partial or no per question to get a 0-100 score, a risk level and a score per category.

NameTypeReqDescription
answersobject–Question id to answer, e.g. {"q1": "yes", "q4": "partial"}. Unanswered questions score zero.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

data_flow_record_check ~87

Use when someone maps personal data flows or builds GDPR records of processing activities (ROPA, Art. 30). Give the flows (name, purpose, data categories, recipients, legal basis, retention, transfers); returns, per flow, what an Art. 30 record still lacks, plus the allowed values for categories, legal bases and safeguards.

NameTypeReqDescription
flowsarrayyes–

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

data_flow_review ~84

Use after data_flow_record_check for a compliance review of each personal data flow: legal basis, special category and children's data, consent and legitimate interest records, retention, international transfer tools and transfer impact assessments, and DPIA need, with an action, GDPR article and 30/60/90-day roadmap. Requires ClevSec Pro.

NameTypeReqDescription
flowsarrayyes–

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

dora_checklist ~141

Use for 'what does DORA require?', DORA compliance checklists or gap reviews. Returns the core DORA (Regulation (EU) 2022/2554) requirements for financial entities, grouped by section with the article for each, leaving out those that DORA itself disapplies for microenterprises or for entities under the simplified ICT risk management framework of Art. 16.

NameTypeReqDescription
microenterpriseboolean–The financial entity is a microenterprise (DORA Art. 3(60))
simplified_frameworkboolean–The entity is listed in DORA Art. 16(1) and uses the simplified framework

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

dora_classify_incident ~507

Use when a bank, insurer, investment firm, payment or crypto-asset firm or other financial entity has an IT outage, cyber attack or data incident and asks whether it must be reported under DORA. Classifies the ICT-related incident as major or not under DORA, applying the criteria and materiality thresholds of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2024/1772 (Arts. 6, 8 and 9). Returns the decision, which criteria are met, and the reporting time limits if major. Leave out what you do not know.

NameTypeReqDescription
affected_clients_countinteger––
affected_clients_percentnumber–Affected clients as % of all clients using the affected service
affected_counterparts_percentnumber–Affected financial counterparts as % of those active in the affected service
affected_transactions_number_percentnumber–Affected transactions as % of the daily average number for the service
affected_transactions_value_percentnumber–Affected transaction amount as % of the daily average value for the service
affects_authorised_or_supervised_servicesboolean–Financial services requiring authorisation or registration, or supervised, are affected (Art. 6(b))
affects_critical_or_important_functionsboolean–ICT services or systems supporting critical or important functions are affected (Art. 6(a))
costs_and_losses_eurnumber–Direct and indirect costs and losses per Art. 7, without financial recoveries
critical_service_downtime_hoursnumber–Downtime of ICT services supporting critical or important functions
data_impact_adverseboolean–Impact on availability, authenticity, integrity or confidentiality of data that harms business objectives or regulatory compliance (Art. 9(5)(a))
duration_hoursnumber––
member_states_with_impactinteger––
relevant_clients_or_counterparts_affectedboolean–Clients or counterparts identified as relevant under Art. 1(3) are affected
reputational_impactboolean–Media coverage, repetitive complaints, likely failure to meet regulatory requirements, or likely loss of clients with material impact (Art. 2)
successful_malicious_unauthorised_accessboolean–A successful, malicious and unauthorised access to network and information systems occurred that may result in data losses (Arts. 6(c), 9(5)(b))

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

dora_gap_assessment ~136

Use to assess how ready a financial entity is for DORA, or to find its gaps. Call without answers to get the 39 questions in five pillars (ICT risk management, incident management, resilience testing, ICT third-party risk, information sharing), each with its DORA article. Call with answers (yes, partial, no per question id) to get a score per pillar, an overall readiness level and the gaps.

NameTypeReqDescription
answersobject–Question id to answer, e.g. {"p1_1": "yes", "p2_3": "partial"}. Unanswered questions count as gaps.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

dora_remediation_plan ~115

Use after dora_gap_assessment when the user wants a plan to close their DORA gaps. Turns the same answers into every gap with a recommended action, a priority, the DORA article and a 30/60/90-day roadmap (ICT risk management and incident management first). Requires ClevSec Pro.

NameTypeReqDescription
answersobjectyesQuestion id to answer, e.g. {"p1_1": "yes", "p2_3": "partial"}. Unanswered questions count as gaps.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

gdpr_breach_decision ~286

Use when a personal data breach has happened (data lost, stolen, sent to the wrong person, encrypted by ransomware, accessed without authorisation) to decide whether the GDPR requires notifying the supervisory authority within 72 hours (Art. 33) and the people affected (Art. 34), applying the exceptions. Needs the risk level of the breach: unlikely, risk or high.

NameTypeReqDescription
data_unintelligibleboolean–The affected data were unintelligible to unauthorised people, e.g. state-of-the-art encryption with the key not compromised
hours_since_awarenumber–Hours since the controller had a reasonable degree of certainty that a breach occurred
individual_contact_disproportionateboolean–Contacting each person would involve disproportionate effort, e.g. no contact details
riskstringyesLikely risk to people's rights and freedoms (EDPB Guidelines 9/2022): consider the type of breach, the sensitivity and volume of the data, how easily people can be identified, how severe the conseque…
rolestring–Controller decides why and how data are processed; a processor acts on its behalf
subsequent_measures_remove_high_riskboolean–Measures taken since then ensure the high risk is no longer likely to materialise

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

gdpr_checklist_assessment ~136

Use to check how far an organisation is with GDPR compliance, or to list what GDPR requires in practice. Call without input to get the 48 checklist items in 8 areas (lawfulness, transparency and rights, minimisation and retention, security, breaches, processors, accountability, international transfers), each with its article. Call with the ids done (and optional items not applicable) to get the completion score and the open items.

NameTypeReqDescription
donearray–Ids of the items already in place
not_applicablearray–Ids of optional items that do not apply (only items marked optional)

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

gdpr_dpia_report ~1,112

Use after gdpr_dpia_screening when the user needs the DPIA worked out: a risk register linking each high or medium risk to its measures with coverage and indicative residual risk, and every gap (legal basis, special category data, necessity, missing measures, transfers, prior consultation under Art. 36) with an action, priority, article and a 30/60/90-day roadmap. Requires ClevSec Pro.

NameTypeReqDescription
c1string–Does the processing evaluate or score people (profiling or predicting their performance, finances, health, preferences, reliability, behaviour or location)?
c2string–Does it involve automated decisions with legal or similarly significant effects (for example access to credit, a job or a service)?
c3string–Does it involve systematic monitoring of people (for example online tracking, employee monitoring or CCTV)?
c4string–Does it involve sensitive or highly personal data (special category or criminal data, financial data, location data or private communications)?
c5string–Is the processing large-scale (many people, a large volume or range of data, a long duration or a wide geographic area)?
c6string–Does it combine or match datasets from different sources in ways people would not expect?
c7string–Does it concern vulnerable people (children, employees, patients, the elderly, or others in an unequal relationship with you)?
c8string–Does it use innovative technology or a new way of using existing technology (for example AI, biometrics or IoT)?
c9string–Could the processing itself prevent people from exercising a right or using a service or contract (for example credit screening that decides whether to offer a loan)?
m1string–Encryption of personal data at rest and in transit
m10string–Data Processing Agreements with all third-party processors
m11string–Privacy by design principles applied in system architecture
m12string–Mechanism for data subjects to exercise their rights easily
m2string–Pseudonymization or anonymization where possible
m3string–Access controls limiting who can view/modify the data
m4string–Regular security testing (vulnerability scans, penetration tests)
m5string–Staff training on data protection for those handling the data
m6string–Data minimization — collecting only what is strictly necessary
m7string–Automated deletion at end of retention period
m8string–Incident response plan covering this processing activity
m9string–Regular audits or reviews of the processing activity
nec1string–Is the processing necessary to achieve the stated purpose, or could the purpose be achieved with less data?
nec2string–Is the amount of data collected proportionate to the purpose?
nec3string–Is the retention period limited to what is necessary?
nec4string–Are data subjects adequately informed about the processing (transparency)?
nec5string–Can data subjects exercise their rights (access, rectification, erasure, portability)?
nec6string–If relying on consent, is it freely given, specific, informed, and withdrawable?
nec7string–If relying on legitimate interest, has a balancing test been conducted?
proj_dataarray–Categories of personal data
proj_legalstring–Legal basis for processing
proj_subjectsarray–Categories of data subjects
r1string–Risk of unauthorized access to personal data (data breach)
r10string–Risk of loss of confidentiality (e.g. medical or legal privilege)
r2string–Risk of data being used for purposes beyond what was communicated
r3string–Risk of inaccurate data leading to wrong decisions about individuals
r4string–Risk of excessive data collection beyond what is needed
r5string–Risk of insufficient transparency — individuals unaware of processing
r6string–Risk of discrimination or unfair treatment based on the processing
r7string–Risk of financial loss or economic disadvantage to individuals
r8string–Risk of reputational damage or social disadvantage to individuals
r9string–Risk of physical harm or safety concerns
t1string–Will you systematically and extensively evaluate people by automated means (including profiling), and base decisions on it that have legal or similarly significant effects on them?
t2string–Will you process special category data (health, biometric, genetic, racial or ethnic origin, political opinions, religion, trade union membership, sex life or sexual orientation) or criminal convicti…
t3string–Will you systematically monitor a publicly accessible area on a large scale (for example CCTV in shops, stations or streets)?
t4string–Is this type of processing on your supervisory authority's published list of operations that require a DPIA?
x1string–Will personal data be transferred outside the EU/EEA (including remote access from outside the EEA)?

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

gdpr_dpia_screening ~1,109

Use when someone plans new processing of personal data (a new system, AI use, monitoring, profiling) and asks whether a data protection impact assessment is required or how risky it is. Applies GDPR Art. 35(3), national lists and the nine WP248 rev.01 criteria, scores necessity and mitigation, and gives an indicative residual risk. Call without input to get the questions; every input is optional.

NameTypeReqDescription
c1string–Does the processing evaluate or score people (profiling or predicting their performance, finances, health, preferences, reliability, behaviour or location)?
c2string–Does it involve automated decisions with legal or similarly significant effects (for example access to credit, a job or a service)?
c3string–Does it involve systematic monitoring of people (for example online tracking, employee monitoring or CCTV)?
c4string–Does it involve sensitive or highly personal data (special category or criminal data, financial data, location data or private communications)?
c5string–Is the processing large-scale (many people, a large volume or range of data, a long duration or a wide geographic area)?
c6string–Does it combine or match datasets from different sources in ways people would not expect?
c7string–Does it concern vulnerable people (children, employees, patients, the elderly, or others in an unequal relationship with you)?
c8string–Does it use innovative technology or a new way of using existing technology (for example AI, biometrics or IoT)?
c9string–Could the processing itself prevent people from exercising a right or using a service or contract (for example credit screening that decides whether to offer a loan)?
m1string–Encryption of personal data at rest and in transit
m10string–Data Processing Agreements with all third-party processors
m11string–Privacy by design principles applied in system architecture
m12string–Mechanism for data subjects to exercise their rights easily
m2string–Pseudonymization or anonymization where possible
m3string–Access controls limiting who can view/modify the data
m4string–Regular security testing (vulnerability scans, penetration tests)
m5string–Staff training on data protection for those handling the data
m6string–Data minimization — collecting only what is strictly necessary
m7string–Automated deletion at end of retention period
m8string–Incident response plan covering this processing activity
m9string–Regular audits or reviews of the processing activity
nec1string–Is the processing necessary to achieve the stated purpose, or could the purpose be achieved with less data?
nec2string–Is the amount of data collected proportionate to the purpose?
nec3string–Is the retention period limited to what is necessary?
nec4string–Are data subjects adequately informed about the processing (transparency)?
nec5string–Can data subjects exercise their rights (access, rectification, erasure, portability)?
nec6string–If relying on consent, is it freely given, specific, informed, and withdrawable?
nec7string–If relying on legitimate interest, has a balancing test been conducted?
proj_dataarray–Categories of personal data
proj_legalstring–Legal basis for processing
proj_subjectsarray–Categories of data subjects
r1string–Risk of unauthorized access to personal data (data breach)
r10string–Risk of loss of confidentiality (e.g. medical or legal privilege)
r2string–Risk of data being used for purposes beyond what was communicated
r3string–Risk of inaccurate data leading to wrong decisions about individuals
r4string–Risk of excessive data collection beyond what is needed
r5string–Risk of insufficient transparency — individuals unaware of processing
r6string–Risk of discrimination or unfair treatment based on the processing
r7string–Risk of financial loss or economic disadvantage to individuals
r8string–Risk of reputational damage or social disadvantage to individuals
r9string–Risk of physical harm or safety concerns
t1string–Will you systematically and extensively evaluate people by automated means (including profiling), and base decisions on it that have legal or similarly significant effects on them?
t2string–Will you process special category data (health, biometric, genetic, racial or ethnic origin, political opinions, religion, trade union membership, sex life or sexual orientation) or criminal convicti…
t3string–Will you systematically monitor a publicly accessible area on a large scale (for example CCTV in shops, stations or streets)?
t4string–Is this type of processing on your supervisory authority's published list of operations that require a DPIA?
x1string–Will personal data be transferred outside the EU/EEA (including remote access from outside the EEA)?

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

gdpr_fine_estimate ~337

Use for 'how big could a GDPR fine be?' or 'how are GDPR fines calculated?'. Applies step 2 of the EDPB Guidelines 04/2022 method: the Art. 83(4) or 83(5) legal maximum, the starting amount band for the seriousness of the infringement, and the turnover adjustment. Give the seriousness, or the facts to let ClevSec suggest it. Returns a starting range in EUR, not a prediction of a real fine.

NameTypeReqDescription
annual_turnover_eurnumberyesTotal worldwide annual turnover of the undertaking in the preceding financial year, in EUR
damagestring––
data_categoriesarray–basic contact data, financial, other personal (e.g. location), special categories (Art. 9), children's data, criminal data (Art. 10)
durationstring–short: under a month; medium: 1 to 12 months; long: over a year
faultstring–low: measures in place but one failed; clear: a known risk not addressed; intent: intentional or against advice
infringement_tierstringyes83(4): controller/processor obligations such as security (Art. 32) and breach notification (Arts. 33-34). 83(5): principles, legal basis, data subject rights, transfers
people_affectedinteger––
seriousnessstring–Seriousness per EDPB Guidelines 04/2022 para. 60; omit to have it suggested from the facts below

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

gdpr_remediation_plan ~117

Use after gdpr_checklist_assessment when the user wants a plan to close their GDPR gaps. Turns the same input into every open item with a recommended action, a priority, the GDPR article and a 30/60/90-day roadmap (lawfulness, records, breach handling and processor contracts first). Requires ClevSec Pro.

NameTypeReqDescription
donearray–Ids of the items already in place
not_applicablearray–Ids of optional items that do not apply (only items marked optional)

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

iso27001_gap_assessment ~137

Use to check how close an organisation is to ISO/IEC 27001:2022 certification, or to list the Annex A controls in practice. Call without answers to get 41 control checks in four themes (organizational, people, physical, technological) with their Annex A references. Call with a status per control (implemented, partial, planned, not_impl) to get a score per theme, a readiness level and the gaps.

NameTypeReqDescription
answersobject–Control question id to status, e.g. {"o1": "implemented", "t3": "planned"}. Unanswered controls count as gaps.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

iso27001_remediation_plan ~113

Use after iso27001_gap_assessment when the user wants a plan towards ISO/IEC 27001 certification. Turns the same statuses into every gap with a recommended action, a priority, the Annex A control and a 30/60/90-day roadmap (organizational controls first). Requires ClevSec Pro.

NameTypeReqDescription
answersobjectyesControl question id to status, e.g. {"o1": "implemented", "t3": "planned"}. Unanswered controls count as gaps.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

maturity_assessment ~113

Use to measure an organisation's cybersecurity maturity or to benchmark it against NIST CSF 2.0. Call without answers to get 39 capabilities in the six CSF functions and the 1-5 levels. Call with a level per capability to get the average per function and an overall maturity level.

NameTypeReqDescription
answersobject–Question id to maturity level 1-5, e.g. {"gv1": 2, "id1": 3}. Unanswered questions count as level 1.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

maturity_improvement_plan ~130

Use after maturity_assessment when the user wants to raise their maturity. Lists every capability below the target level (3 or 4) with the next action, NIST CSF 2.0 subcategory, NIS2 article and a 30/60/90-day roadmap (govern and identify first). Requires ClevSec Pro.

NameTypeReqDescription
answersobjectyesQuestion id to maturity level 1-5, e.g. {"gv1": 2, "id1": 3}. Unanswered questions count as level 1.
target_levelinteger––

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

mcp_tools_check ~189

Use before enabling an MCP server or connecting to an A2A agent ('is this MCP server safe to add?', 'check these tool descriptions'). Pass the server's tools/list response or the agent's Agent Card as document. Returns flags for hidden or manipulative text in descriptions (tool poisoning), risky capabilities (running code, sending data out, an exfiltration path), annotations that do not match, secrets in parameters and missing Agent Card security fields, with a level per tool and a SHA-256 fingerprint to detect later changes. Reads declared metadata only; it does not connect to the server.

NameTypeReqDescription
document–yesThe JSON to check: a tools/list response (JSON-RPC response, its result, or the tools array) or an A2A Agent Card.
publicboolean–A2A only: true if the agent is deliberately public (no authentication by design).

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

mcp_tools_report ~168

Use after mcp_tools_check when the user wants a review report or to see what changed since approval. Pass document (current tools/list response or Agent Card) and optionally previous (the approved version). Returns every flag with an action, a priority, OWASP and MCP Security Audit Kit references, a change comparison (added, removed and changed tools with the changed fields) and an inventory row. Requires ClevSec Pro.

NameTypeReqDescription
document–yesThe JSON to check: a tools/list response (JSON-RPC response, its result, or the tools array) or an A2A Agent Card.
previous––Optional: the previously approved version, to compare.
publicboolean–A2A only: true if the agent is deliberately public (no authentication by design).

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

nis2_gap_assessment ~156

Use to assess how ready an organisation is for NIS2 cybersecurity requirements, or to find its gaps. Call without answers to get the 53 questions in nine domains (governance, risk, incidents, continuity, supply chain, network security, vulnerabilities, training, cryptography), each mapped to NIS2 Arts. 20, 21 or 23. Call with answers (yes, partial, no per question id) to get a score per domain, an overall readiness level and the gaps.

NameTypeReqDescription
answersobject–Question id to answer, e.g. {"g1": "yes", "r2": "partial"}. Omit to get the questions. Unanswered questions count as gaps.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

nis2_remediation_plan ~122

Use after nis2_gap_assessment when the user wants a plan to close their NIS2 gaps. Turns the same answers into every gap with a recommended action, a priority, the NIS2 article and a 30/60/90-day roadmap (governance, risk and incident gaps first). Requires ClevSec Pro.

NameTypeReqDescription
answersobjectyesQuestion id to answer, e.g. {"g1": "yes", "r2": "partial"}. Omit to get the questions. Unanswered questions count as gaps.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

nis2_scope_check ~313

Use for questions like 'does NIS2 apply to my company?', 'are we an essential or important entity?' or 'is a company of this size and sector in scope?'. Indicates whether the NIS2 Directive applies to an organisation and in which category (essential or important), from its sector, size and type, applying Arts. 2 and 3 of Directive (EU) 2022/2555 and the size rule of Recommendation 2003/361/EC. An indication only: national law and the member state's list decide.

NameTypeReqDescription
annual_turnover_eurnumber––
balance_sheet_total_eurnumber––
critical_entity_under_cerboolean–Identified as a critical entity under Directive (EU) 2022/2557
designated_by_member_stateboolean–Identified by the member state under Art. 2(2)(b)-(e)
national_security_or_law_enforcementboolean–Public administration working in national security, public security, defence or law enforcement (Art. 2(7))
provider_typestring–Special provider types covered regardless of size (Art. 2(2)(a), 2(4))
public_administrationstring––
sectorstring–The Annex I or II sector of the entity's activity; omit if none applies
staff_headcountnumberyesStaff in annual work units, including partner and linked enterprises

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

privacy_notice_requirements ~188

Use when writing or checking a privacy policy or privacy notice. Lists every item the GDPR requires with its article, for data collected from the person (Art. 13) or obtained from other sources (Art. 14), when the notice must be given, and the exceptions. Tell it which situations apply to drop items you do not need.

NameTypeReqDescription
automated_decisionsboolean–Solely automated decisions with legal or similarly significant effects, including profiling (Art. 22)
has_dpoboolean–A data protection officer is appointed
relies_on_consentboolean––
relies_on_legitimate_interestsboolean––
sourcestring–data_subject: collected from the person (forms, accounts, cookies); other_source: from third parties, public sources or data brokers
transfers_outside_eeaboolean––

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

reporting_deadlines ~119

Use for any question about incident or breach reporting deadlines in the EU (for example 'how long do we have to report a breach / a cyber incident?'). Lists who must report what, to whom and by when under GDPR (personal data breaches), NIS2 (significant incidents), DORA (major ICT-related incidents at financial entities) and the Cyber Resilience Act (actively exploited vulnerabilities and severe incidents), with the article for each deadline and when the clock starts.

NameTypeReqDescription
regimesarray–Limit to these regimes; omit for all

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

vendor_due_diligence_plan ~633

Use after vendor_risk_assessment when the user needs to act on a vendor's gaps. Returns every gap with an action, the evidence to request from the vendor, ISO 27001 / GDPR / NIS2 / DORA references and a roadmap (before signing first), plus the contract clauses to include (GDPR Art. 28, NIS2 Art. 21, DORA Art. 30 when they apply). Requires ClevSec Pro.

NameTypeReqDescription
bcp1string–Does the vendor have a business continuity / disaster recovery plan?
bcp2string–Does the vendor offer a defined SLA with uptime guarantees?
bcp3string–Can data be exported/migrated if you terminate the relationship?
bcp4string–Does the vendor have geographic redundancy for critical services?
bcp5string–Is the vendor financially stable (no signs of distress)?
com1string–Is the vendor compliant with GDPR (if processing EU personal data)?
com2string–Will the vendor sign a Data Processing Agreement?
com3string–Does the vendor provide right-to-audit or access to audit reports?
com4string–Does the vendor's contract include security requirements and SLAs?
com5string–Does the vendor have adequate insurance coverage (cyber liability)?
criticalitystring–How critical is this vendor to your operations?
dataAccessarray–What data will this vendor access?
inc1string–Does the vendor have a documented incident response plan?
inc2string–Will the vendor notify you of security incidents within 24-48 hours?
inc3string–Has the vendor experienced any data breaches in the last 3 years?
inc4string–Does the vendor conduct incident response exercises/tabletop tests?
regimesarray–Which of these apply to your organization? (optional)
sec1string–Does the vendor hold relevant security certifications (ISO 27001, SOC 2, etc.)?
sec2string–Does the vendor have a documented information security policy?
sec3string–Does the vendor encrypt data at rest and in transit?
sec4string–Does the vendor enforce multi-factor authentication?
sec5string–Does the vendor conduct regular penetration testing?
sec6string–Does the vendor have a vulnerability management program?
sec7string–Does the vendor perform background checks on employees with data access?
sup1string–Does the vendor disclose its key subprocessors/subcontractors?
sup2string–Will the vendor notify you before changing subprocessors?
sup3string–Does the vendor assess the security of its own suppliers?
sup4string–Are subprocessor contracts held to the same security standards?
vendorTypestring–Type of service

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

vendor_risk_assessment ~630

Use when an organisation evaluates a supplier, SaaS or ICT provider (vendor due diligence, third-party risk, supply chain security under NIS2 Art. 21(2)(d) or DORA). Call without input to get the questions. Call with the vendor profile (type, criticality, data access, regimes) and answers (yes, partial, no, unknown) to get a risk score, risk level, monitoring tier and the gaps.

NameTypeReqDescription
bcp1string–Does the vendor have a business continuity / disaster recovery plan?
bcp2string–Does the vendor offer a defined SLA with uptime guarantees?
bcp3string–Can data be exported/migrated if you terminate the relationship?
bcp4string–Does the vendor have geographic redundancy for critical services?
bcp5string–Is the vendor financially stable (no signs of distress)?
com1string–Is the vendor compliant with GDPR (if processing EU personal data)?
com2string–Will the vendor sign a Data Processing Agreement?
com3string–Does the vendor provide right-to-audit or access to audit reports?
com4string–Does the vendor's contract include security requirements and SLAs?
com5string–Does the vendor have adequate insurance coverage (cyber liability)?
criticalitystring–How critical is this vendor to your operations?
dataAccessarray–What data will this vendor access?
inc1string–Does the vendor have a documented incident response plan?
inc2string–Will the vendor notify you of security incidents within 24-48 hours?
inc3string–Has the vendor experienced any data breaches in the last 3 years?
inc4string–Does the vendor conduct incident response exercises/tabletop tests?
regimesarray–Which of these apply to your organization? (optional)
sec1string–Does the vendor hold relevant security certifications (ISO 27001, SOC 2, etc.)?
sec2string–Does the vendor have a documented information security policy?
sec3string–Does the vendor encrypt data at rest and in transit?
sec4string–Does the vendor enforce multi-factor authentication?
sec5string–Does the vendor conduct regular penetration testing?
sec6string–Does the vendor have a vulnerability management program?
sec7string–Does the vendor perform background checks on employees with data access?
sup1string–Does the vendor disclose its key subprocessors/subcontractors?
sup2string–Will the vendor notify you before changing subprocessors?
sup3string–Does the vendor assess the security of its own suppliers?
sup4string–Are subprocessor contracts held to the same security standards?
vendorTypestring–Type of service

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

Install

How do I install the ClevSec EU compliance tools MCP server?

ClevSec EU compliance tools is a hosted endpoint at https://mcp.clevsec.one/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.clevsec.one

# add to Claude Code
claude mcp add --transport http one-clevsec-eu-compliance 'https://mcp.clevsec.one/mcp'
Common questions

What is the ClevSec EU compliance tools MCP server?

ClevSec EU compliance tools is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as one.clevsec/eu-compliance. Deterministic, sourced EU compliance checks: NIS2, DORA, GDPR and the Cyber Resilience Act. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://mcp.clevsec.one/mcp).

Is the ClevSec EU compliance tools MCP server safe to use?

ClevSec EU compliance tools scores 75 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 ClevSec EU compliance tools MCP server expose?

ClevSec EU compliance tools exposes 31 tools: reporting_deadlines, nis2_scope_check, nis2_gap_assessment, dora_classify_incident, dora_checklist, and 26 more. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 8,190 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.

Does the ClevSec EU compliance tools MCP server require authentication?

No. We connected to ClevSec EU compliance tools without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.

Is the ClevSec EU compliance tools MCP server still maintained?

ClevSec EU compliance tools 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.