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.opsloft/tariff-resolver

NPM · TARIFF-RESOLVER · SCANNED SEP 22

US import duty research: HTS codes, Chapter 99 duties, MPF/HMF fees, landed cost. USITC data.

Available components

+1 this week 83 Trust /100
Trust breakdown (7 categories)

How this component scores in each security and reliability category. Every signal is checked automatically from public evidence about the published package, including repeated runs of it in an isolated sandbox, and we only credit what we can confirm. How we score → Why this is hard to score →

Supply Chain Security98
  • No malware found by supply-chain analysis.Pass
  • No known CVEs affecting this package version or its production dependencies.Pass
  • No install/post-install scripts declared.Pass
  • 31 of 96 dependencies flagged as unhealthy. View diagnostics → Partial
Provenance & Transparency45
Schema Quality & AI Usability77
  • AI-judged instruction clarity (excellent).Pass
  • Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 625 tokens (~125/item across 5 items; 5 tools + 0 resources), over budget; trim descriptions and params. See how to fix → Fail
  • Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management93
  • Stability observed for 28 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 5 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
  • An AI judge read all 5 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
Install

How do I install the io.github.opsloft/tariff-resolver MCP server?

io.github.opsloft/tariff-resolver runs locally as an npm package, launched with npx -y tariff-resolver. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.

npm · tariff-resolver

# add to Claude Code
claude mcp add opsloft-tariff-resolver -- npx -y tariff-resolver
// .cursor/mcp.json
{
  "mcpServers": {
    "opsloft-tariff-resolver": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "tariff-resolver"
      ]
    }
  }
}
// .vscode/mcp.json
{
  "servers": {
    "opsloft-tariff-resolver": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "tariff-resolver"
      ]
    }
  }
}
# add to Codex CLI
codex mcp add opsloft-tariff-resolver -- npx -y tariff-resolver
// opencode.json
{
  "$schema": "https://opencode.ai/config.json",
  "mcp": {
    "opsloft-tariff-resolver": {
      "type": "local",
      "command": [
        "npx",
        "-y",
        "tariff-resolver"
      ],
      "enabled": true
    }
  }
}
# add to OpenClaw
openclaw mcp add opsloft-tariff-resolver --command npx --arg -y --arg tariff-resolver
# ~/.hermes/config.yaml
mcp_servers:
  opsloft-tariff-resolver:
    command: "npx"
    args: ["-y", "tariff-resolver"]
// ~/.netclaw/config/netclaw.json
{
  "McpServers": {
    "opsloft-tariff-resolver": {
      "Transport": "stdio",
      "Command": "npx",
      "Arguments": [
        "-y",
        "tariff-resolver"
      ]
    }
  }
}
# add to Vellum
assistant mcp add opsloft-tariff-resolver -t stdio -c npx -a -y tariff-resolver
// mcp.json
{
  "mcpServers": {
    "opsloft-tariff-resolver": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "tariff-resolver"
      ]
    }
  }
}
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.

  • 21 Sept 26 −1
    • Stability: pass → 0.90 functional
  • 19 Sept 26 0
    • Stability: 0.97 → pass security
  • 18 Sept 26 +1

    No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 93 to 97. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 28 days of observed history at the previous scan, 29 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.

  • 16 Sept 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.

  • 14 Sept 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.

  • 12 Sept 26 +1

    No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 73 to 77. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 22 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.

  • 9 Sept 26 +1

    No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 63 to 67. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 19 days of observed history at the previous scan, 20 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.

  • 7 Sept 26 +1

    No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 57 to 60. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 17 days of observed history at the previous scan, 18 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 22 Sept 2026 · Analysed npm/tariff-resolver@1.1.0

Provenance No attestation

The registry publishes no build provenance for this version, so there is nothing to verify.

Result No attestation
Ecosystem npm

Background: How many MCP packages publish verified provenance →

Dependencies 96 packages
Packages resolved 96
Stale 31
Tree resolution Complete

Background: SBOMs and build attestations, explained →

MCP tools · 5 exposed · ~625 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
calculate_tariff_scenario ~246

Returns the HTS code's MFN/FTA base rate, ALL active chapter 99 rules (IEEPA/301/232 additional duties) matching the origin as verbatim text, and MPF/HMF fees. The LLM should walk the chapter-99 exception chains itself to stack the right duty layers, explain each step to the user, and always note this is an estimate.

NameTypeReqDescription
customs_value_usdnumberyesCustoms value of the shipment (USD)
hts_codestringyes8-10 digit HTS code, with or without dots
ocean_freightbooleanOcean shipment? (applies HMF)
origin_countrystringyesCountry of origin: ISO-3166 alpha-2 code (e.g. 'CN') or English country name (e.g. 'China')
quantitynumberQuantity in the code's units (No./Dz Pcs...) — needed for per-piece specific duties
weight_kgnumberTotal weight (kg) — REQUIRED when the code carries a specific duty per kg (e.g. '12.4¢/kg')

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

check_tariff_updates ~76

Compares the current HTS snapshot with the previously fetched one. Call without codes to check the whole watchlist. Returns each change: code, column (general/special/other/additionalDuties), old → new value.

NameTypeReqDescription
hts_codesarrayLimit to these codes (default: the watchlist)

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

dataset_info ~24

Fetch date, source, license, row counts — use to check data freshness.

Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

search_hs_candidates ~181

Returns top 8-10 digit HTS code candidates (with MFN/FTA rates and CBP CROSS ruling links) for a product description. Results are CANDIDATES for pre-broker screening, not a classification ruling. IMPORTANT: the HTS uses legal terminology, not trade names — BEFORE CALLING, rewrite the product description into HTS-style material + use nouns (e.g. 'pink kids backpack' → 'travel bags of man-made fibers'; 'water bottle' → 'vacuum flask' or 'bottle of plastics'). If you get 0 results, retry with 2-3 different phrasings.

NameTypeReqDescription
limitintegerNumber of candidates
product_descriptionstringyesProduct description in English: material, use, composition (e.g. 'stainless steel insulated water bottle 500ml')

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

watch_tariff_changes ~98

Saves HTS codes (with optional origin) to a local watchlist. After each dataset refresh, call check_tariff_updates to see whether the rates on these codes changed. This is how you track 2025-2026 tariff volatility without manual re-checking.

NameTypeReqDescription
hts_codesarrayyes8-10 digit HTS codes to watch
origin_countrystringShared origin for the shipment (optional)

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

Common questions

What is the io.github.opsloft/tariff-resolver MCP server?

io.github.opsloft/tariff-resolver is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.opsloft/tariff-resolver. US import duty research: HTS codes, Chapter 99 duties, MPF/HMF fees, landed cost. USITC data. This page covers its npm package (tariff-resolver).

Is the io.github.opsloft/tariff-resolver MCP server safe to use?

io.github.opsloft/tariff-resolver scores 83 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. We found no known CVEs affecting it as of 22 September 2026. It declares no install or post-install scripts. 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.opsloft/tariff-resolver MCP server expose?

io.github.opsloft/tariff-resolver exposes 5 tools: search_hs_candidates, calculate_tariff_scenario, watch_tariff_changes, check_tariff_updates, dataset_info. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 625 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.

Is the io.github.opsloft/tariff-resolver MCP server still maintained?

io.github.opsloft/tariff-resolver is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 22 September 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.

What licence is the io.github.opsloft/tariff-resolver MCP server under?

io.github.opsloft/tariff-resolver declares the MIT licence, which is OSI-approved. That covers the source only, and says nothing about the cost of any service it calls.