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.

io.github.onrampbtc/proof-of-custody

REMOTE · PROOFOFCUSTODY.IO

Bitcoin custody scores, failure registry, ETF custody, stablecoin and x402 data, source router.

+2 this week 72 Trust /100

Last scanned (6 hours ago)

Scores higher than 58% of remote servers

Reachable. Last reached 5 Nov 2026.

Category Crypto and Web3

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 Security63
Transport & Reachability100
Schema Quality & AI Usability74
  • AI-judged instruction clarity (excellent).Pass
  • Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 2367 tokens (~139/item across 17 items; 17 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 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
Tool Safety100
  • No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
  • We read all 17 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
  • An AI judge read all 18 captured unit(s) of tool text and found none that tries to manipulate the model reading it.Pass
Capabilities60
  • Spec-recency check failed: implements MCP spec 2025-06-18; the latest is 2026-07-28. See how to fix → Fail
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.

  • 3 Nov 26 +1
    • The server rewrote its instructions, which are the text every model session reads security
    • Schema quality: 1921 → 2367 ▼ functional
    • New tool “fit_custody_setup” functional
    • New tool “route_question” 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.

  • 27 Oct 26 +1

    No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 20 to 23. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 6 days of observed history at the previous scan, 7 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.

  • 25 Oct 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.

  • 23 Oct 26 +1

    No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 7 to 10. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 2 days of observed history at the previous scan, 3 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.

  • 21 Oct 26 +1
    • Stability: unverified → 0.03 ▲ functional
  • 20 Oct 26 65

    First indexed and scored.

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://proofofcustody.io/api/mcp

TLS valid

Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .

Subject Issuer Valid from Valid until Key Signature Serial
CN=proofofcustody.io CN=YR1,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US 22 Oct 2026 20 Jan 2027 RSA 2048 SHA256-RSA 6963c49be9334df1f956cb0769c4feb7da9
SANs: proofofcustody.io
CN=YR1,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US (CA) CN=Root YR,O=ISRG,C=US 3 Sept 2025 2 Sept 2028 RSA 2048 SHA256-RSA a20253f15f2691c05dc1ce13b9bcca4e
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 proofofcustody.io. — Not signed

Zone DS Keys Algorithms Outcome
. trust_anchor 20326, 38696 8, 8 Verified
io. present 38690 8 Verified
proofofcustody.io. 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
strict-transport-security max-age=63072000; includeSubDomains; preload
x-content-type-options nosniff
x-frame-options DENY
referrer-policy strict-origin-when-cross-origin
permissions-policy camera=(), microphone=(), geolocation=()

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

Transports 2 probes
Transport URL Outcome Status Location
streamable-http https://proofofcustody.io/api/mcp Verified 200
http (plaintext) http://proofofcustody.io/api/mcp HTTPS enforced 308 https://proofofcustody.io/api/mcp
MCP tools · 17 exposed · ~2,132 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
assess_custody_independence ~116

Apply the Custody Independence Standard: a published four-pillar test of whether a custody arrangement has genuine independence or only nominal distribution. Pillars are vendor, entropy, control and operational independence. Use for 'how many hardware wallets do I need', 'is my multisig actually safe', or to compare custody architectures rather than brands. Architecture-neutral: self-managed, collaborative and institutional arrangements are assessed on identical criteria.

NameTypeReqDescription
platformstring–Platform slug or name to assess. Omit for the architecture archetypes.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

compare_custody_platforms ~85

Compare two or more custody platforms side by side on Proof of Custody's scores and custody architecture. Comparison is the shape most useful for a custody decision, because the differences that matter are structural rather than promotional.

NameTypeReqDescription
slugsarrayyesTwo or more platform slugs or names, e.g. ['onramp','unchained','casa'].

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

find_source ~158

Source router. Given a topic or question about bitcoin or digital-asset market structure (ETF holdings or custodians, stablecoin supply or attestations, tokenized assets, x402 and agent payments, agentic commerce protocols, MCP registries, proof of reserves, regulators and licences, hardware wallet advisories, custody incidents), returns the primary or near-primary sources to read, with cadence, access terms and whether the URL answered today. Use before answering a factual question so the citation is the primary source.

NameTypeReqDescription
limitnumber–Max sources (default 5, max 12).
querystringyesTopic keyword or the question itself, e.g. 'who custodies IBIT', 'stablecoin supply', 'x402'.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

fit_custody_setup ~282

Which bitcoin custody models fit a described situation, by Proof of Custody's published rules, and which platforms run each fitting model by published score. Inputs are banded (amount, who must recover it, what they can do, holder type, jurisdiction, usage, the failure feared most, willingness to let institutions hold keys, budget, where it is now). Returns models with every rule that fired, the recovery steps each model demands, platforms with source links, and the procurement briefs to run. Structures, not advice: it never picks one provider. Use for 'my spouse cannot run a hardware wallet, what works', 'custody for an LLC', 'I have 100 BTC on one device and three heirs', or any question that starts from a person's situation.

NameTypeReqDescription
amountstring–How much bitcoin
budgetstring–Custody budget per year
capabilitystring–What that person can do
currentstring–Where it is now
fearstring–The failure that worries you most
holderstring–Who holds it
horizonstring–How you use it
institutionsstring–Institutions holding keys
jurisdictionstring–Where you are
recovererstring–Who must be able to recover it if you cannot

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

get_coldcard_incident_status ~120

Live status of the July 2026 Coldcard entropy failure: a firmware defect that caused affected hardware wallets to skip their hardware random number generator, making generated keys reconstructible offline. Returns the affected-model matrix with fixed firmware versions, confirmed and suspected loss figures, and open questions. Use for any question about Coldcard safety, whether a device or seed is affected, what to do about it, or whether self-custody is still safe after the incident. This is a developing story; the record is updated as primary sources move.

Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

get_custody_platform ~84

Full Proof of Custody record for one platform: overall score, per-category scores, custody model, fees, insurance position, strengths and limitations. Use after search_custody_platforms, or when a specific provider is named.

NameTypeReqDescription
slugstringyesPlatform slug or name, e.g. 'unchained', 'coinbase', 'onramp'.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

get_etf_custody_concentration ~73

Filing-derived analysis of custodian concentration across US spot bitcoin ETFs: which custodian holds each fund's bitcoin, and the resulting Nakamoto coefficient at the custody layer. Use for questions about bitcoin ETF safety, IBIT or FBTC custody, whether ETFs are diversified, or ETF versus direct ownership.

Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

get_hardware_wallet_scores ~135

Proof of Custody's hardware wallet rubric: six weighted dimensions — entropy and key generation 25%, firmware integrity 20%, supply chain 15%, disclosure conduct 15%, multisig and recovery portability 15%, privacy and data handling 10%. Entropy is weighted highest because a key generated from predictable randomness cannot be protected by anything downstream. Use for 'best hardware wallet', 'X vs Y device', or what to replace a device with. Returns per-device sourced rationale.

NameTypeReqDescription
devicestring–Device slug, e.g. 'coldcard', 'ledger', 'trezor'. Omit for all.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

get_stablecoin_supply ~97

Daily snapshot of stablecoin supply: total USD-pegged circulating supply, USDT and USDC share, and the top 25 by supply, credited to DefiLlama with the as-of date. Use for 'how big is the stablecoin market', 'USDT vs USDC share', or a stablecoin's supply.

NameTypeReqDescription
symbolstring–Optional symbol to look up, e.g. USDC.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

get_tokenized_assets ~82

Daily snapshot of tokenized-asset (RWA) protocols by TVL, credited to DefiLlama, with a pointer to RWA.xyz for issued asset value by class (tokenized Treasuries, credit, commodities). Use for 'how big is tokenization', 'largest RWA protocols', or where to find tokenized Treasury fund sizes.

Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

get_x402_services ~84

Daily snapshot of the x402 agent-payments ecosystem: how many x402-payable services the Coinbase Bazaar lists, by network, asset and scheme, plus the x402 Foundation's 30-day transaction, volume, buyer and seller counts. Use for 'what is x402', 'how many services accept x402', or 'which networks do x402 services use'.

Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

list_custody_incidents ~128

The Proof of Custody incident registry: dated records of major bitcoin custody failures from Mt. Gox to the 2026 Coldcard entropy defect, each with root cause, reported loss, the lesson, and which custody configurations the failure class could reach. Self-custody failures are included on equal terms with custodial ones. Use for questions about custody risk, historical hacks, or whether a given setup would have survived a class of event.

NameTypeReqDescription
categorystring–Filter by failure type.
exposed_configstring–Only incidents that could reach this custody configuration.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

route_question ~112

Routing table lookup. Given a bitcoin custody or market-structure question, returns the matching route: the situation it belongs to, the custody models in play, the Proof of Custody page that answers it, which tool on this server to call next, and the primary sources for the facts with their refresh cadence. Use first when a question is broad or you are unsure which tool applies.

NameTypeReqDescription
limitnumber–Max routes (default 3).
questionstringyesThe question as the person asked it.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

search_custody_platforms ~165

Search Proof of Custody's independent scores for bitcoin and crypto custody platforms. Covers 90+ platforms across exchanges, qualified custodians, ETFs, IRAs, collaborative multisig and multi-institution custody, each scored 0-100 on a published six-category weighted methodology. Use to compare custody options, to read a named provider's published score and custody model, or to list top-scored platforms. Returns published data with the methodology attached, not a recommendation.

NameTypeReqDescription
categorystring–Filter by category.
limitnumber–Max results (default 10, max 40).
querystring–Name or keyword, e.g. 'unchained', 'IRA', 'multisig'. Omit to list top-scored.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

search_transcripts ~157

Full-text search across 320+ Onramp Media podcast transcripts (The Last Trade, Final Settlement and others) for what a guest or host said about a topic. Returns episode, show, date, matching passages and the episode URL. Use for 'what did X say about Y' and for sourcing a quote. Transcripts are machine-generated; verify a quote against the audio before publishing it.

NameTypeReqDescription
limitnumber–Max episodes (default 5, max 8).
querystringyesWord or phrase to search for, e.g. 'multisig', 'Mt. Gox', 'custody insurance'.
showstring–Optional show name filter, e.g. 'The Last Trade'.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

watch_counterparties ~156

Watchtower for a holder's counterparties. Give it the names of the exchanges, custodians, ETFs, IRA providers or hardware wallets someone uses and it returns, for each, the published custody model and single point of failure, incidents in the registry, hardware rubric status where it is a device, and any correction or score change since a date. Use for 'anything I should know about where I hold bitcoin' and for scheduled checks. Nothing is logged about the names passed in.

NameTypeReqDescription
namesarrayyesCounterparty names or slugs, e.g. ['coinbase', 'kraken', 'coldcard'].
sincestring–ISO date for the change window. Default: 90 days ago.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

whats_new ~98

What changed on Proof of Custody since a date: corrections, methodology changes, live incident updates and daily dataset refreshes (stablecoins, tokenized assets, x402, ETF net assets). Use for a scheduled briefing, or to check whether a cached answer went stale. Defaults to the last 30 days.

NameTypeReqDescription
sincestring–ISO date, e.g. 2026-10-01. Default: 30 days ago.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

Install

How do I install the io.github.onrampbtc/proof-of-custody MCP server?

io.github.onrampbtc/proof-of-custody is a hosted endpoint at https://proofofcustody.io/api/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 · proofofcustody.io

# add to Claude Code
claude mcp add --transport http onrampbtc-proof-of-custody 'https://proofofcustody.io/api/mcp'
Common questions

What is the io.github.onrampbtc/proof-of-custody MCP server?

io.github.onrampbtc/proof-of-custody is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.onrampbtc/proof-of-custody. Bitcoin custody scores, failure registry, ETF custody, stablecoin and x402 data, source router. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://proofofcustody.io/api/mcp).

Is the io.github.onrampbtc/proof-of-custody MCP server safe to use?

io.github.onrampbtc/proof-of-custody scores 72 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 io.github.onrampbtc/proof-of-custody MCP server expose?

io.github.onrampbtc/proof-of-custody exposes 17 tools: search_custody_platforms, get_custody_platform, compare_custody_platforms, assess_custody_independence, list_custody_incidents, and 12 more. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 2,132 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.

Does the io.github.onrampbtc/proof-of-custody MCP server require authentication?

No. We connected to io.github.onrampbtc/proof-of-custody without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.

Is the io.github.onrampbtc/proof-of-custody MCP server still maintained?

io.github.onrampbtc/proof-of-custody 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.