Agile Today
REMOTE · AGILE-TODAY.ORG
Project management methodology graph: route planning, stage-gate decisions and plan checks.
Available components
Last scanned (19 hours ago)
Scores higher than 94% of remote servers
Reachable. Last reached 4 Nov 2026.
Category Project Management
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 Security80
- The endpoint's TLS certificate is valid, in date, and uses a strong key. View diagnostics → Pass
- No authorisation is required to call this server. Every tool declares its destructiveHint and none is destructive, so open access doesn't expose one. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Partial
- HTTPS is enforced; there's no plaintext access path. View diagnostics → Pass
- The HSTS (Strict-Transport-Security) header is present. View diagnostics → Pass
- DNSSEC check failed: this domain isn't protected by DNSSEC. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
Transport & Reachability100
- Verified streamable-http transport via a live MCP handshake. View diagnostics → Pass
Schema Quality & AI Usability78
- 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 1669 tokens (~208/item across 8 items; 8 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 Management97
- Stability observed for 29 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
Tool Coverage91
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 74% 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 8 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 9 captured unit(s) of tool text and found none that tries to manipulate the model reading it.Pass
Capabilities100
- Implements a current MCP spec version (2026-07-28).Pass
Every change we have recorded for this component, newest first. Security-relevant changes are always shown. ▲ marks a change for the better, ▼ a change for the worse; unmarked changes are neutral.
- 4 Nov 26 0
- Stability: pass → 0.97 functional
- 2 Nov 26 0
- Stability: 0.97 → pass security
- 1 Nov 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.
- 29 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 83 to 87. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 25 days of observed history at the previous scan, 26 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 77 to 80. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 23 days of observed history at the previous scan, 24 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 70 to 73. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 21 days of observed history at the previous scan, 22 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 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.
- 21 Oct 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.
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 4 Nov 2026 · Probed https://agile-today.org/api/mcp?src=mcp-registry
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=agile-today.org | CN=YR2,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US | 17 Oct 2026 | 15 Jan 2027 | RSA 2048 | SHA256-RSA | 6507ddb359c249a68631ec995649c1a70be |
| SANs: agile-today.org | ||||||
| CN=YR2,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US (CA) | CN=Root YR,O=ISRG,C=US | 3 Sept 2025 | 2 Sept 2028 | RSA 2048 | SHA256-RSA | 4ebd24947e24d394802d84a52fd5b319 |
| 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 agile-today.org. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | trust_anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| org. | present | 26974 | 8 | Verified |
| agile-today.org. | 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 |
| x-content-type-options | nosniff |
| x-frame-options | DENY |
| referrer-policy | strict-origin-when-cross-origin |
| permissions-policy | camera=(), microphone=(), geolocation=(), browsing-topics=() |
Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →
Transports 2 probes
| Transport | URL | Outcome | Status | Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| streamable-http | https://agile-today.org/api/mcp?src=mcp-registry | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://agile-today.org/api/mcp?src=mcp-registry | HTTPS enforced | 308 | https://agile-today.org/api/mcp?src=mcp-registry |
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 →
check_gate Check a gate ~585
Evaluates gate g.g0 … g.g10 against your evidence. Outcome precedence: Stop > Recycle > Hold > Conditional go > Go, with the rule that fired (outcome_reason). Critical evidence missing or stale → Hold; required non-critical missing, or a waiver without a reason or an approver who decides at this gate → Conditional go; a waiver with both → Go with the Waiver modifier (under regulation a waived critical artifact stays Conditional go until the deviation is recorded with the quality approval); optional gaps are notes. Modifiers: Work started without the gate, Overdue, Stale, Waiver. gate.deciders decide, gate.advisors take part. A disproved key product hypothesis is a Recycle, not a Stop: pass earlier_stage_invalid:true with invalid_stage:'st.discovery'. At G8 (go / no-go), work_started_beyond:true means production was changed before the decision: Hold (R3), not a Go with a modifier. Call without evidence to list what the gate needs. Returns a receipt hash of the inputs.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| business_case_valid | boolean | – | false → Stop |
| context | object | – | Project context. Unknown keys and values are rejected in the answer envelope with did_you_mean. Defaults: software, hybrid, complicated, tm, single, medium size, ui, data. |
| days_in_stage | number | – | – |
| earlier_stage_invalid | boolean | – | true → Recycle; the answer names the stage to return to |
| evidence | object | – | Map artifact id → state or {state, reason, ref, by, date}. A waiver is {state:'waived', reason, by}: by is the role id of a decider of this gate (see gate.deciders, e.g. r.client_owner) or 'name, rol… |
| gate | string | yes | Gate id, e.g. g.g5 |
| grace_days | number | – | Overrides both limits. Default: 80% of planned_stage_days, else by approach (predictive/hybrid 10, agile/flow 5); required evidence then waits twice as long |
| invalid_artifact | string | – | With earlier_stage_invalid: the artifact that is no longer true, to find where to return |
| invalid_stage | string | – | With earlier_stage_invalid: the stage to return to, if known |
| lang | string | – | Answer language, default en |
| planned_stage_days | number | – | Planned length of the stage in days. With it, missing critical evidence is overdue after 80% of it and missing required evidence after all of it |
| work_started_beyond | boolean | – | True if work of later stages already started (adds the 'work started without the gate' modifier; at G8 it is a Hold) |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
check_mix Check a mix of practices ~154
For a set of ids: antipatterns in the set and detected by rules, conflicts, redundant alternatives (e.g. seven estimation methods), items to avoid or not applicable here, risks, missing inputs and suggested additions. ok = no antipatterns, conflicts, avoid or not-applicable items; a detected pattern of severity warning (e.g. output over outcome on a client contract) does not change ok.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| context | object | – | Project context. Unknown keys and values are rejected in the answer envelope with did_you_mean. Defaults: software, hybrid, complicated, tm, single, medium size, ui, data. |
| ids | array | yes | – |
| lang | string | – | Answer language, default en |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
explain_node Explain a node ~88
One node with its description, conditions, source, level and its links grouped by type, each with a link id (Lxxxx) to cite. Filter with link_types, direction and limit.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| direction | string | – | – |
| id | string | yes | – |
| lang | string | – | Answer language, default en |
| limit | integer | – | – |
| link_types | array | – | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
list_context List context options ~58
Call first. Returns the context dimensions and flags (with defaults and how many rules each flag drives), stages, gates, evidence states and levels, the gate outcome precedence and the suggested workflow.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| lang | string | – | Answer language, default en |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
plan_project Plan a project route ~233
Route from presale to closure for a project context. Default is compact (ids by strength + a names dictionary, core items and gate evidence for all stages, about 6–10k characters). Ask for one stage with stages:['st.design'] and format:'full' for reasons, avoid texts and gate details. 'core' = do it here (context rule, flag or gate-critical artifact), at most 8 work items per stage (producers of the gate's critical artifacts first, then context rules, then flags).
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| context | object | – | Project context. Unknown keys and values are rejected in the answer envelope with did_you_mean. Defaults: software, hybrid, complicated, tm, single, medium size, ui, data. |
| format | string | – | Default compact |
| include | array | – | Default all four |
| lang | string | – | Answer language, default en |
| min_strength | string | – | Default: core for all stages, all when stages are given |
| stages | array | – | Stage ids or codes, e.g. ['st.analysis','design']. Default: all |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
search_graph Search the graph ~69
Search names, ids, descriptions and aliases in English and Russian (word stems, small typos tolerated). Returns total and the best matches.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| lang | string | – | Answer language, default en |
| limit | integer | – | – |
| query | string | yes | – |
| type | string | – | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
validate_plan Validate a plan ~246
Checks an ordered list of steps (stages, gates, events, practices, techniques, notations, artifacts). Errors: empty plan, unknown ids, non-step types, stage order (analysis and design work planned early is only a warning 'early'; building before G3–G5 is an order error), contract after delivery gates, a gate after the step it authorises (G8 after the cutover), antipatterns, avoid or not-applicable items. Warnings: duplicates, redundant alternatives, early work, a cutover with no G8 or go / no-go meeting before it, antipatterns of severity warning. 'Shadow start' looks at the order: G4 or G5 must come before the first build step. 'expected' lists gate evidence not yet produced by earlier steps.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| context | object | – | Project context. Unknown keys and values are rejected in the answer envelope with did_you_mean. Defaults: software, hybrid, complicated, tm, single, medium size, ui, data. |
| evidence | object | – | Artifacts that already exist |
| lang | string | – | Answer language, default en |
| steps | array | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
when_to_use When to use an item ~142
For one event, practice, technique, notation, tool, artifact or antipattern: does it fit this context (fits / avoid / not_applicable / antipattern), its strength and why, alternatives and their group advice, risks, and which gates require it.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| context | object | – | Project context. Unknown keys and values are rejected in the answer envelope with did_you_mean. Defaults: software, hybrid, complicated, tm, single, medium size, ui, data. |
| id | string | yes | e.g. t.planning_poker, p.stage_gating, x.velocity_kpi |
| lang | string | – | Answer language, default en |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the Agile Today MCP server?
Agile Today is a hosted endpoint at https://agile-today.org/api/mcp?src=mcp-registry, 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 · agile-today.org
claude mcp add --transport http org-agile-today-agile-today 'https://agile-today.org/api/mcp?src=mcp-registry'
What is the Agile Today MCP server?
Agile Today is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as org.agile-today/agile-today. Project management methodology graph: route planning, stage-gate decisions and plan checks. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://agile-today.org/api/mcp?src=mcp-registry).
Is the Agile Today MCP server safe to use?
Agile Today scores 87 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 Agile Today MCP server expose?
Agile Today exposes 8 tools: list_context, plan_project, check_gate, when_to_use, check_mix, and 3 more. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 1,575 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the Agile Today MCP server require authentication?
No. We connected to Agile Today without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.
Is the Agile Today MCP server still maintained?
Agile Today is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 4 November 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.