Tx Procurement
NPM · @PIPEWORX/MCP-TX-PROCUREMENT · 2 COMPONENTS
Texas State Procurement MCP — State cooperative-contract awards & vendor sales (keyless).
Available components
Last scanned (4 hours ago)
Scores higher than 34% of npm servers
Category Finance and Payments
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 Security50
- Malware scan not yet available for this package.Unverified
- 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-tx-procurement). 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 Usability59
- AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
- Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 701 tokens (~350/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 Management27
- Stability observed for 8 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 (15)
- 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
Checks we could not complete (1)
These are gaps on our side, not findings about this package. We only credit what we can confirm, so a category made up entirely of them scores 0.
- Malware scan in Supply Chain SecurityMalware scan not yet available for this package.
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.
- 6 Nov 26 −11
- Malware scan: pass → unverified ▼ security
- Stability: unverified → 0.27 ▲ functional
- Package version: 0.2.0 → 0.2.1 functional
- 30 Oct 26 0
- Security disclosure: unverified → fail ▼ 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 6 Nov 2026 · Analysed npm/@pipeworx/mcp-tx-procurement@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-tx-procurement |
| Certificate issuer | https://token.actions.githubusercontent.com |
| Certificate SAN | https://github.com/pipeworx-io/mcp-tx-procurement/.github/workflows/publish.yml@refs/heads/main |
| Rekor log index | 3706297449 |
| Predicate type | SLSA build provenance https://slsa.dev/provenance/v1 |
| Subject digest | sha512:5a5d9ff72f7be03b7e9e7ca8db134ec6a6b503f252659aba0a47cce7270f081cf7d449ba5ee1470d8a4b1b9d31af41c03dd464098aa69eb64e1538280 |
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 →
tx_procurement_awards ~471
Search TEXAS STATE government contract awards & purchases from the official Texas Department of Information Resources (DIR) Cooperative Contract Sales data on data.texas.gov. Each result is a purchase a Texas public entity made against a DIR statewide cooperative contract: the awarding/purchasing customer (agency, university, city, county, or school district), the winning vendor (supplier), the dollar amount, the DIR contract number, the RFO/product description, brand, quantity, and order dates. Filter by vendor, agency/customer, keyword, fiscal year, contract number, and/or a minimum amount; results are ranked by dollar amount (biggest purchases first) by default. Use this for questions like "who won Texas state IT contracts", "biggest vendors to the Texas Health and Human Services Commission", or "Texas state cooperative-contract purchases for Oracle". This is TEXAS STATE data (not federal).
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| agency | string | – | Awarding/purchasing customer name — the buying agency, university, city, county or district (case-insensitive substring), e.g. "Health and Human Services", "Department of Criminal Justice", "Universi… |
| contract_number | string | – | DIR contract number to match (case-insensitive substring), e.g. "DIR-TSO-2539", "DIR-CPO-5165". |
| fiscal_year | number|string | – | Exact Texas fiscal year, e.g. 2024 (available: 2010 through 2025). |
| keyword | string | – | Case-insensitive substring to match against the RFO/product description or brand name, e.g. "cloud", "laptop", "cybersecurity". |
| limit | number|string | – | Max records to return (default 20, max 100). |
| min_amount | number|string | – | Only return purchases whose amount is at least this many dollars, e.g. 100000. |
| offset | number|string | – | Number of records to skip for pagination (default 0). |
| sort | string | – | Sort order: "amount" = largest purchase first (default), "date" = most recent order date first. |
| vendor | string | – | Winning vendor / supplier name to match (case-insensitive substring), e.g. "Dell", "Oracle", "AT&T". |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
tx_procurement_vendor ~173
Aggregate a vendor's TEXAS STATE cooperative-contract sales from the DIR Vendor Sales Report data on data.texas.gov: total dollars sold, number of purchase records, and a breakdown by awarding/purchasing agency (customer), by DIR contract, and by fiscal year. Matches the vendor name as a case-insensitive substring, so it also surfaces name variants (e.g. "Dell" matches "Dell Marketing LP"). Use this to size up a single vendor's business with the State of Texas. This is TEXAS STATE data (not federal).
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| fiscal_year | number|string | – | Optional: restrict to one fiscal year, e.g. 2024. |
| vendor | string | yes | Vendor / supplier name to aggregate (case-insensitive substring), e.g. "Dell", "Oracle", "AT&T". |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the Tx Procurement MCP server?
Tx Procurement runs locally as an npm package, launched with npx -y @pipeworx/mcp-tx-procurement. 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-tx-procurement
claude mcp add pipeworx-io-tx-procurement -- npx -y @pipeworx/mcp-tx-procurement
What is the Tx Procurement MCP server?
Tx Procurement is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.pipeworx-io/tx-procurement. Texas State Procurement MCP, State cooperative-contract awards & vendor sales (keyless). This page covers its npm package (@pipeworx/mcp-tx-procurement).
Is the Tx Procurement MCP server safe to use?
Tx Procurement scores 67 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. We found no known CVEs affecting it as of 6 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 Tx Procurement MCP server expose?
Tx Procurement exposes 2 tools: tx_procurement_awards, tx_procurement_vendor. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 644 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Is the Tx Procurement MCP server still maintained?
Tx Procurement is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 6 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 Tx Procurement MCP server under?
Tx Procurement 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 Tx Procurement MCP server?
VerifyMCP ran 15 checks on Tx Procurement, covering Known CVEs, Install scripts, Dependency health, Source repository and 11 more. One item could not be completed, a gap on our side rather than a finding about Tx Procurement: Malware scan. 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.