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.

College Scorecard

REMOTE · GATEWAY.PIPEWORX.IO · 2 COMPONENTS

College Scorecard MCP — US Department of Education College Scorecard API

−11 this week 63 Trust /100

Last scanned (13 hours ago)

Scores higher than 44% of remote servers

Reachable. Last reached 5 Nov 2026.

Category Education and Research

Recent critical change

Authorization (26 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 Security46
Transport & Reachability100
Schema Quality & AI Usability82
  • 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 23411 tokens (~508/item across 46 items; 46 tools + 0 resources), over budget; trim descriptions and params. See how to fix → Fail
  • Tools include usage examples.Pass
Stability & Change Management33
  • Stability observed for 10 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
  • Structured output schemas are declared (11% 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
  • All 1 tool(s) whose name or description implies an irreversible operation declare an MCP destructiveHint annotation.Pass
  • An AI judge read all 47 captured unit(s) of tool text and found none that tries to manipulate the model reading it.Pass
Capabilities40
  • Spec-recency check failed: implements MCP spec 2025-03-26; the latest is 2026-07-28. See how to fix → Fail
What we tested

Checks we ran (13)

  • TLS certificate
  • Authorization
  • HTTPS
  • HSTS header
  • DNSSEC
  • Transport
  • Schema quality
  • Stability
  • Tool coverage
  • Injection markers
  • Destructive annotations
  • Judged manipulation
  • MCP protocol

Does not apply to this hosted endpoint (2)

  • Supply Chain SecurityScored on package channels only. This is a hosted endpoint, so there is nothing to install or inspect.
  • Provenance & TransparencyScored on package channels only. This is a hosted endpoint, so there is nothing to install or inspect.

The score does not measure everything. What the score does not measure →

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.

  • 5 Nov 26 −14
    • Authorization: pass → fail ▼ critical
  • 4 Nov 26 +14
    • Authorization: fail → pass ▲ security
    • The server rewrote its instructions, which are the text every model session reads security
    • Tool “deep_research” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • Tool “ask_pipeworx_grounded” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • Tool “ask_pipeworx_beta” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • Tool “ask_pipeworx” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
  • 3 Nov 26 −13
    • Authorization: pass → fail ▼ critical
    • The server rewrote its instructions, which are the text every model session reads security
    • Tool “deep_research” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • Tool “ask_pipeworx_grounded” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • Tool “ask_pipeworx” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • Tool “ask_pipeworx_beta” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
  • 2 Nov 26 +14
    • Authorization: fail → pass ▲ security
    • The server rewrote its instructions, which are the text every model session reads security
    • Tool “deep_research” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • Tool “ask_pipeworx” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • Tool “ask_pipeworx_beta” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • Tool “ask_pipeworx_grounded” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
  • 1 Nov 26 −13
    • Authorization: pass → fail ▼ critical
    • The server rewrote its instructions, which are the text every model session reads security
    • Tool “ask_pipeworx” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • Tool “ask_pipeworx_beta” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • Tool “ask_pipeworx_grounded” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • Tool “deep_research” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
  • 31 Oct 26 0
    • The server rewrote its instructions, which are the text every model session reads security
    • Tool “ask_pipeworx” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • Tool “ask_pipeworx_beta” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • Tool “ask_pipeworx_grounded” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • Tool “deep_research” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
  • 30 Oct 26 +1
    • The server rewrote its instructions, which are the text every model session reads security
    • Tool “deep_research” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • Tool “ask_pipeworx” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • Tool “ask_pipeworx_beta” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • Tool “ask_pipeworx_grounded” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • Tool “compare_entities” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
  • 29 Oct 26 0
    • The server rewrote its instructions, which are the text every model session reads security
    • Tool “ask_pipeworx_grounded” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • Tool “bet_research” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • Tool “deep_research” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • Tool “ask_pipeworx_beta” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • Tool “ask_pipeworx” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • “bet_research” reworded the description of “market” cosmetic
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://gateway.pipeworx.io/college-scorecard/mcp

TLS valid

Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .

Subject Issuer Valid from Valid until Key Signature Serial
CN=pipeworx.io CN=WE1,O=Google Trust Services,C=US 19 Sept 2026 18 Dec 2026 ECDSA 256 ECDSA-SHA256 907077ac952af983139424aa9b807ef7
SANs: pipeworx.io, gateway.pipeworx.io, *.gateway.pipeworx.io
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 gateway.pipeworx.io. — Not signed

Zone DS Keys Algorithms Outcome
. Trust anchor 20326, 38696 8, 8 Verified
io. DS published 38690 8 Verified
pipeworx.io. No DS 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://gateway.pipeworx.io/college-scorecard/mcp Verified 200
http (plaintext) http://gateway.pipeworx.io/college-scorecard/mcp Served over HTTP 200
MCP tools · 46 exposed · ~23,178 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
search_schools ~132

Search US colleges and universities by name. Returns school name, location, tuition, admission rate, student size, median earnings, and completion rate. Example: search_schools("MIT", "MA").

NameTypeReqDescription
_apiKeystringyesapi.data.gov API key
limitnumber–Number of results to return (default: 10, max: 100)
querystringyesSchool name to search for (e.g., "Stanford", "community college")
statestring–Two-letter state code to filter (e.g., "CA", "NY")
NameTypeReqDescription
querystringyesSearch query string provided
returnednumberyesNumber of schools in this response
schoolsarrayyesList of matching schools
statestring|nullyesState filter (uppercase) or null
totalnumberyesTotal matching schools in database
{"query":"Stanford University","state":"CA"}
{"limit":5,"query":"MIT","state":"MA"}
search_within ~238

Semantic search INSIDE a fetched record. Pass the text you already pulled (e.g. a SEC 10-K body, an article, a long tool result) plus a natural-language query; get back the top-N passages with character offsets and similarity scores. Use when the record is too big to cram into the prompt — search_within saves context, returns only the passages that matter, and every passage carries an offset so the agent can verify a verbatim quote. Pairs with ask_pipeworx_grounded: fetch with the gateway, ground over the relevant passages instead of the whole document. BGE-base-en embeddings + cosine over 500-char overlapping windows; cap is 200K chars (longer inputs are truncated and flagged).

NameTypeReqDescription
limitnumber–Max passages to return (1-20, default 5).
querystringyesNatural-language query — what passages do you want? E.g. "supply-chain risk", "fiscal year 2024 revenue", "drug interactions with warfarin".
textstringyesThe document text to search inside (max ~200K chars).

No output schema declared.

{"query":"supply-chain risk","text":"Apple Inc. reported fiscal 2023 revenue of $383.285 billion, driven by strong iPhone and Services growth. Net income was $96.995 billion. The company faced supply-chain risk in China during the quarter."}
subscribe ~943

Create a proactive monitoring subscription to a live-data event stream. Returns the new subscription id. Requires a Pipeworx OAuth account (anonymous + BYO cannot persist subscriptions). Supported types: "sec_8k" (8-K filings matching ticker + item codes — e.g. items:["5.02"] = officer change), "polymarket_edge" (Polymarket↔Kalshi cross-venue mispricings — params:{topic:"fed"}), "fred_series" (new FRED observations — params:{series_id:"UNRATE"}), "patent_grant" (new USPTO grants for an applicant), "clinical_trial" (new/updated ClinicalTrials.gov studies), "form_d" (new SEC Form D fundraise notices — params:{state?, industry?, min_amount?, exemption?}, all optional), "news_keyword" (GDELT keyword news alerts, metadata+link only — params:{query, lang?, domains?}), "job_post" (new public job-board postings — params:{ats?, board_token?} or {domain?}, plus optional title_query/location_query), "tool_diff" (re-runs any read-only tool on a schedule and fires on change — params:{tool, args?, fields[], schedule}), "new_entity" (new business registrations from a state business-entity registry — params:{state:"CO", name_query?, entity_type?}), "tech_change" (a watched domain's website technology stack adds or drops a technology — params:{domains:["acme.com"], technologies?}). Delivery channels: feed (always on — pull via recent_alerts or GET registry.pipeworx.io/alerts.json), and optionally email (set delivery:{email:"you@x.com"}) or sms (delivery:{sms:"+15551234567"} — phone must be verified at /account first; 10/day cap).

NameTypeReqDescription
deliveryobject–Optional delivery channels in addition to the always-on persistent feed. {email:"you@x.com"} sends a templated alert per fired event. {sms:"+15551234567"} sends an SMS per event — must match the veri…
paramsobjectyesType-specific filter. sec_8k: {ticker:"AAPL", items?:["5.02","1.01"]}. polymarket_edge: {topic:"fed", min_spread_bps?:500}. fred_series: {series_id:"UNRATE"}. patent_grant: {applicant:"Apple Inc."}.…
typestringyesSubscription type.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

suggest_questions ~240

What can I ask Pipeworx? / what is Pipeworx good for? / what can you do? / give me ideas / show me examples / getting started / what data do you have? — the onboarding entry point for an agent that just connected and wants to know what is worth asking. Returns category-bucketed example questions (company financials, drugs & clinical trials, economics, real estate, prediction markets, weather, government & patents, science & academia, news) — each with the exact tool + argument shape that answers it, drawn from the live catalog of thousands of tools. Call with no arguments for the full spread, or pass `topic` (e.g. "finance", "pharma", "betting") to focus. Use this FIRST when you do not yet know what Pipeworx can do for you, or to learn how to call the meta-tools (ask_pipeworx, entity_profile, compare_entities, etc.).

NameTypeReqDescription
topicstring–Optional focus area: finance | pharma | economics | real-estate | betting | weather | government | science | news. Omit for a cross-category spread.

No output schema declared.

{"topic":"finance"}
unsubscribe ~60

Cancel a subscription by id. Ownership is enforced — you can only cancel your own subscriptions. The row is deactivated (not deleted) so its historical events stay available via recent_alerts.

NameTypeReqDescription
idstringyesSubscription id (uuid) returned by subscribe.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

updown_divergence_rate ~586

How often two venues settled the SAME 15-minute crypto window differently, over every settled window on record. Compares polymarket.com (Chainlink TWAP) with Kalshi and with Polymarket US (both CF Benchmarks BRTI), and Kalshi with Polymarket US as the same-feed control. Per pair: windows both venues settled, divergent count, the rate with its 95% Wilson interval (withheld under 30 paired windows), which direction they split, and what was excluded (unsettled on a side, 50-50). A HEADLINE RATE IS A CONCENTRATION QUESTION, so every pair also carries `concentration` (UTC days and hours the divergent windows fell in, the busiest day, the top-3-day share, and a plain reading) and `by_how_decided` (the rate by how far the reference venue's mid was from 50 at its last priced minute: the rate is a fraction of a percent for windows that were decided by the end and tens of percent for the ones that were not). `divergent_path` gives the mean Up mid by minute on both venues over the divergent windows only, split by who said Up, so the "early spike that fades" story can be checked rather than assumed. Measured on the archive 2026-10-27 over 30 days of btc: polymarket.com vs Kalshi diverged on 48 of 2,847 windows (1.69%, interval 1.27-2.23), spread over 27 of 31 UTC days, 0.19% of windows decided by the end and 17-29% of the ones still undecided; Polymarket US vs Kalshi on 0 of 1,838. asset btc | eth | sol | xrp | bnb (bnb has no pair: Kalshi only); days 1-90 (default 30), capped by what the archive holds (it starts 2026-09-22 for polymarket.com and Kalshi, 2026-10-07 for Polymarket US). Read-only; cheap enough to call, it reads several thousand archive rows.

NameTypeReqDescription
assetstring–btc (default) | eth | sol | xrp | bnb. The archive holds btc/eth on all three venues, sol/xrp on polymarket.com and Polymarket US, bnb on Kalshi only (no pair).
daysnumber–Look-back in days, 1-90 (default 30). The archive starts 2026-09-22 (polymarket.com, Kalshi) and 2026-10-07 (Polymarket US, btc), so a longer span is capped by what is held; coverage is reported per…

No output schema declared.

{"asset":"btc","days":30}
{"asset":"eth","days":14}
updown_venue_compare ~719

The same 15-minute crypto "up or down" window priced on polymarket.com, Polymarket US and Kalshi, side by side, with whether each pair is actually the same contract. Pass asset (btc | eth | sol | xrp | bnb) and window ("current" default, "next", "previous", or the window START as ISO such as 2026-10-27T14:15:00Z, on a 15-minute boundary). Per venue: question, Up bid / ask / mid / last, spread_pp, quote_state, volume WITH ITS UNIT, open interest, liquidity, settlement source, comparison basis, when it settles. THE VENUES ARE NOT ONE CONTRACT. Kalshi and Polymarket US settle on CF Benchmarks' BRTI (60-second average at the end against the same at the start): the same bet, so a gap between them is a real disagreement. polymarket.com settles on a Chainlink 60-second TWAP, end against start: same comparison shape, different feed, so a gap against either is partly the contract. `pairs[]` gives equivalent ("true"|"false"|"unclear"|"not_comparable") from resolution_diff for every pair, material_differences, mid_diff_pp (a minus b, in percentage points) and read_as in words. Measured over 30 days of settled windows the Chainlink and BRTI feeds settle a window differently about 1.2-1.8% of the time, almost entirely windows that ended near the threshold (see updown_divergence_rate). `net_spread` is computed only for the pair that is equivalent: the gap in mid terms and at top of book (buy Up where cheaper at the ask, Down where Up is dearer at 1 minus the bid) after BOTH venues' taker fees, each fee carrying its verified-as-of date. Top-of-book size is shown where the venue publishes it (Polymarket US); the Kalshi figure is not in its market payload, so read its order book before sizing. A venue with no market for the window is {status:"not_listed", reason}; one that could not be read is {status:"unavailable", refusal} -- never an empty object, and never the same thing. A one-sided book (typical Polymarket US just before a window is decided) has quote_state "bid_only", a null…

NameTypeReqDescription
assetstring–btc (default) | eth | sol | xrp | bnb. Coverage differs by venue; a venue that does not list the asset answers not_listed.
horizonstring–15m (default and the only value offered).
windowstring–"current" (default), "next", "previous", or the window START as an ISO-8601 timestamp on a 15-minute boundary, e.g. 2026-10-27T14:15:00Z. An unaligned timestamp is refused, not rounded.

No output schema declared.

{"asset":"btc","horizon":"15m","window":"current"}
{"asset":"eth","window":"previous"}
{"asset":"btc","window":"2026-10-27T14:30:00Z"}
validate_claim ~370

"Is it true that…" / "fact check" / "verify the claim that…" / "did X really…" / "was Y actually…" / "confirm or refute" / "true or false" — natural-language claim verification against authoritative sources. Use whenever the agent needs to check whether something a user said is factually correct. Company-financial claims (revenue, net income, cash for public US companies) verify via the structured SEC EDGAR + XBRL fast path with exact percent-delta math; ANY OTHER factual claim (macro statistics, rates, prices, drug data, records) automatically falls through to the grounded pipeline — routed to the right live source, answered with verbatim evidence, then judged. Returns a verdict (confirmed / approximately_correct / refuted / inconclusive / unsupported / could_not_verify), the grounded or structured actual value with pipeworx:// citation, and reasoning. IMPORTANT for callers: could_not_verify means the check did not happen (our LLM or source failed) and carries verification_error{stage,detail} — it is NOT evidence for or against the claim, and must not be shown as one. unsupported means we looked and cover no source for it. Replaces 4–6 sequential calls (NL parsing → entity resolution → data lookup → comparison).

NameTypeReqDescription
claimstringyesNatural-language factual claim, e.g., "Apple's FY2024 revenue was $400 billion" or "Microsoft made about $100B in profit last year".
tolerance_pctnumber–Max percent deviation still graded approximately_correct (0.5–50). Overrides the tolerance implied by the claim wording — set 1–2 for hallucination detection where any material error must be refuted.…

No output schema declared.

{"claim":"Apple's fiscal 2023 revenue was $383 billion"}
Install

How do I install the College Scorecard MCP server?

College Scorecard is a hosted endpoint at https://gateway.pipeworx.io/college-scorecard/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 · gateway.pipeworx.io

# add to Claude Code
claude mcp add --transport http pipeworx-io-college-scorecard 'https://gateway.pipeworx.io/college-scorecard/mcp'
Common questions

What is the College Scorecard MCP server?

College Scorecard is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.pipeworx-io/college-scorecard. College Scorecard MCP, US Department of Education College Scorecard API. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://gateway.pipeworx.io/college-scorecard/mcp).

Is the College Scorecard MCP server safe to use?

College Scorecard scores 63 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 College Scorecard MCP server expose?

College Scorecard exposes 46 tools: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, search_within, deep_research, and 41 more. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 23,178 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.

Does the College Scorecard MCP server require authentication?

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

Is the College Scorecard MCP server still maintained?

College Scorecard 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.

What did VerifyMCP test on the College Scorecard MCP server?

VerifyMCP ran 13 checks on College Scorecard, covering TLS certificate, Authorization, HTTPS, HSTS header and 9 more. Supply Chain Security and Provenance & Transparency do not apply to a hosted endpoint, so they were not tested. The score does not measure everything, and the scoring documentation lists what it leaves out.