Property Records
NPM · @PIPEWORX/MCP-PROPERTY-RECORDS · 2 COMPONENTS
Property Records MCP — address-level US property records (sales history, assessed value, owner…
Available components
Last scanned (20 hours ago)
Scores higher than 69% of npm servers
Category Maps and Location
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 Security100
- 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
- No production dependencies, so there is no dependency health to assess. View diagnostics → Pass
Provenance & Transparency97
- Source repository is publicly reachable at the declared URL. View diagnostics → Pass
- Cryptographically verified build provenance (signed, bound to pipeworx-io/mcp-property-records). View diagnostics → Pass
- Clear OSI-approved license (MIT).Pass
- Actively maintained (last published 0 days ago).Pass
- Disclosure check failed: no security disclosure policy was found in the source repository. See how to fix → Fail
Schema Quality & AI Usability58
- AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
- Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 834 tokens (~417/item across 2 items; 2 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 Management23
- Stability observed for 7 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 2 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 3 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
Checks we ran (16)
- Malware scan
- Known CVEs
- Install scripts
- Dependency health
- Source repository
- Provenance
- License
- Maintenance
- Security disclosure
- Schema quality
- Stability
- Tool coverage
- Injection markers
- Destructive annotations
- Judged manipulation
- MCP protocol
Does not apply to this package (2)
- Endpoint SecurityScored on hosted endpoints only. A package has no live endpoint of its own for us to probe.
- Transport & ReachabilityScored on hosted endpoints only. A package has no live endpoint of its own for us to probe.
The score does not measure everything. What the score does not measure →
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
- Stability: 0.17 → unverified ▼ security
- Tool safety: pass → unverified ▼ security
- Capabilities: pass → unverified ▼ functional
- Tool coverage: 100 → unverified ▼ functional
- First check of Schema quality: unverified functional
- Package version: 0.2.0 → 0.2.1 functional
- 2 Nov 26 +2
- Stability: unverified → 0.13 ▲ functional
- 29 Oct 26 78
First indexed and scored.
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 · Analysed npm/@pipeworx/mcp-property-records@0.2.1
Provenance Verified
A signed build attestation was found and verified, binding this exact artifact to the source repository it claims to come from.
| Result | Verified |
|---|---|
| Ecosystem | npm |
| Reason | Verified |
| Discovered via | Registry attestation endpoint |
| Source repo | pipeworx-io/mcp-property-records |
| Certificate issuer | https://token.actions.githubusercontent.com |
| Certificate SAN | https://github.com/pipeworx-io/mcp-property-records/.github/workflows/publish.yml@refs/heads/main |
| Rekor log index | 3691863658 |
| Predicate type | SLSA build provenance https://slsa.dev/provenance/v1 |
| Subject digest | sha512:d2f6968b37e591182aa8ab1b4190c5321270b1cd9da1b5240c306a77bfca4d92c176431b44d66ed28539049efcd6af4f8b6e6a02208cd4f8e29cf4670 |
Background: How many MCP packages publish verified provenance →
Dependencies 0 packages
| Packages resolved | 0 |
|---|---|
| Tree resolution | Complete |
Background: SBOMs and build attestations, explained →
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 →
property_coverage ~193
The capability matrix for property_lookup: every county and city this pack can answer address-level property-record questions for, and exactly which fields each one publishes — sales history (and whether it includes a price), owner name, assessed value, physical characteristics — plus the data vintage, refresh cadence, per-jurisdiction caveats, and the upstream source URL. Use this before promising a user an answer, to check whether their county is in the dataset and whether the specific field they asked about (sale price, owner, bed/bath) actually exists there. US property records are county-maintained and there is no national keyless source, so this list is the whole supported set. Example: {} → 5 jurisdictions, of which 4 publish sale prices and 4 publish owner names.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| jurisdiction | string | – | Optional. Return detail for one jurisdiction only: dc | nyc | philadelphia | cook | sf. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
property_lookup ~587
Address-level US property records from county and city open-data portals — keyless public records, no API key. Answers "when did this house last sell", "how much did <address> sell for", "who owns this property", "what is the assessed value of <address>", "property sale history", "county assessor data for an address". Returns the property sale history (dated transactions with price where the county publishes it), current assessed value, owner of record, parcel id (DC SSL / NYC BBL / Philadelphia OPA account / Cook County PIN / SF block-lot), land use or building class, year built, square footage, and bed/bath counts where available. SUPPORTED JURISDICTIONS ONLY — property records are maintained per county and there is no national keyless source. Currently covered: dc (Washington, District of Columbia); nyc (New York City (Manhattan, Bronx, Brooklyn, Queens, Staten Island)); philadelphia (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania); cook (Cook County, Illinois (Chicago and suburbs)); sf (San Francisco, California). An address in any other county returns covered:false with the inferred jurisdiction and the supported list, so you can tell the user plainly that this county is not in the dataset rather than guessing. Call property_coverage first if you want the field-by-field capability matrix. Examples: {"address":"1642 30th St NW, Washington DC"} → DC row house, SSL 1282 0198, owner, $1,354,300 assessed, sold 2012-08-09 for $1,085,000, 3 bed / 2.5 bath / 1,510 sqft built 1907. {"address":"232 East 6th Street, Manhattan"} → NYC BBL 1004610024 with the 2016-present sale list. {"address":"228 Spruce St, Philadelphia"} → full recorded deed chain with grantor/grantee. {"address":"3000 N Sheffield Ave, Chicago"} → Cook County PIN, sale, assessed value. {"address":"450 Sutter St, San Francisco"} → assessed value and characteristics (no price — SF does not publish it).
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| address | string | yes | Street address as free text. City / state / ZIP are optional but improve jurisdiction inference, e.g. "1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW", "232 East 6th Street, New York, NY 10003", "3000 N Sheffield Ave, Chi… |
| jurisdiction | string | – | Optional. Skip inference and query a specific portal. One of: dc | nyc | philadelphia | cook | sf. |
| max_sales | number|string | – | Maximum sale/transfer records to return, 1-50 (default 20, newest first). |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the Property Records MCP server?
Property Records runs locally as an npm package, launched with npx -y @pipeworx/mcp-property-records. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.
npm · @pipeworx/mcp-property-records
claude mcp add pipeworx-io-property-records -- npx -y @pipeworx/mcp-property-records
What is the Property Records MCP server?
Property Records is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.pipeworx-io/property-records. Property Records MCP, address-level US property records (sales history, assessed value, owner… This page covers its npm package (@pipeworx/mcp-property-records).
Is the Property Records MCP server safe to use?
Property Records scores 81 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. We found no known CVEs affecting it as of 5 November 2026. It declares no install or post-install scripts. Its build provenance is signed and verified. 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 Property Records MCP server expose?
Property Records exposes 2 tools: property_lookup, property_coverage. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 780 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Is the Property Records MCP server still maintained?
Property Records 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 licence is the Property Records MCP server under?
Property Records declares the MIT licence, which is OSI-approved. That covers the source only, and says nothing about the cost of any service it calls.
What did VerifyMCP test on the Property Records MCP server?
VerifyMCP ran 16 checks on Property Records, covering Malware scan, Known CVEs, Install scripts, Dependency health and 12 more. Endpoint Security and Transport & Reachability do not apply to an npm package, so they were not tested. The score does not measure everything, and the scoring documentation lists what it leaves out.