LMGram
REMOTE · API.LMGRAM.COM · SCANNED SEP 21
Consent-based human matchmaking for peer advice, collaboration, and practical help.
Available components
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 Security89
- The endpoint's TLS certificate is valid, in date, and uses a strong key. View diagnostics → Pass
- Authorisation is enforced on tool calls, advertised via RFC 9728 protected-resource metadata. Discovery is public, which costs nothing: no tool can be invoked without a token. View diagnostics → Pass
- HTTPS is enforced; there's no plaintext access path. View diagnostics → Pass
- HSTS check failed: the Strict-Transport-Security header is absent. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
- DNSSEC check failed: this domain isn't protected by DNSSEC. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
- The authorisation server offers only Dynamic Client Registration (RFC 7591), which MCP 2026-07-28 deprecated in favour of Client ID Metadata Documents. View diagnostics → Partial
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 (good).Pass
- Tool/resource definitions use about 419 tokens (~59/item across 7 items; 6 tools + 1 resources), lean.Pass
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management100
- No destabilizing schema changes in the last 30 days.Pass
Tool Coverage77
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 31% 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
- All 1 tool(s) whose name or description implies an irreversible operation declare an MCP destructiveHint annotation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 7 captured unit(s) of tool text and found none that tries to manipulate the model reading it.Pass
Capabilities60
- Spec-recency check failed: implements MCP spec 2025-03-26; the latest is 2026-07-28. See how to fix → Fail
- Supports UI / widget rendering.Pass
How do I install the LMGram MCP server?
LMGram is a hosted endpoint at https://api.lmgram.com/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 · api.lmgram.com
claude mcp add --transport http saezbaldo-lmgram 'https://api.lmgram.com/mcp'
{
"mcpServers": {
"saezbaldo-lmgram": {
"url": "https://api.lmgram.com/mcp"
}
}
} {
"servers": {
"saezbaldo-lmgram": {
"type": "http",
"url": "https://api.lmgram.com/mcp"
}
}
} [mcp_servers.saezbaldo-lmgram] url = "https://api.lmgram.com/mcp"
{
"$schema": "https://opencode.ai/config.json",
"mcp": {
"saezbaldo-lmgram": {
"type": "remote",
"url": "https://api.lmgram.com/mcp",
"enabled": true
}
}
} openclaw mcp add saezbaldo-lmgram --url 'https://api.lmgram.com/mcp' --transport streamable-http
mcp_servers:
saezbaldo-lmgram:
url: "https://api.lmgram.com/mcp" {
"McpServers": {
"saezbaldo-lmgram": {
"Transport": "http",
"Url": "https://api.lmgram.com/mcp"
}
}
} assistant mcp add saezbaldo-lmgram -t streamable-http -u 'https://api.lmgram.com/mcp'
{
"mcpServers": {
"saezbaldo-lmgram": {
"type": "http",
"url": "https://api.lmgram.com/mcp"
}
}
} The mcpServers block is a cross-client convention. Remote transports vary, so check your client's docs.
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.
- 1 Sept 26 +4
- HTTPS: fail → pass ▲ security
- 28 Aug 26 0
- Tool “list_match_requests” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- “list_match_requests” added an optional parameter “status” cosmetic
- 26 Aug 26 +2
- We updated how we score, so this day's move reflects our rubric, not a change to the server See what changed → functional
- 25 Aug 26 0
- Stability: 0.97 → pass security
- 24 Aug 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.
- 15 Aug 26 0
- Tool “list_messages” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- Tool “request_human_match” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- Schema quality: 40 → 57 ▼ functional
- Schema quality: fair → good functional
- “request_human_match” reworded the description of “need” cosmetic
- “request_human_match” reworded the description of “summary” cosmetic
- “request_human_match” reworded the description of “topic” cosmetic
- 11 Aug 26 0
- We updated how we score, so this day's move reflects our rubric, not a change to the server See what changed → functional
- 31 Jul 26 0
- We updated how we score, so this day's move reflects our rubric, not a change to the server See what changed → functional
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 21 Sept 2026 · Probed https://api.lmgram.com/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=lmgram.com | CN=WR3,O=Google Trust Services,C=US | 15 Aug 2026 | 13 Nov 2026 | RSA 2048 | SHA256-RSA | 267f8f76c22b54391050e84553a5cb09 |
| SANs: lmgram.com, www.lmgram.com, partners.lmgram.com, app.lmgram.com, api.lmgram.com | ||||||
| CN=WR3,O=Google Trust Services,C=US (CA) | CN=GTS Root R1,O=Google Trust Services LLC,C=US | 13 Dec 2023 | 20 Feb 2029 | RSA 2048 | SHA256-RSA | 7ff005a91568d63abc22861684aa4b5a |
| CN=GTS Root R1,O=Google Trust Services LLC,C=US (CA) | CN=GlobalSign Root CA,OU=Root CA,O=GlobalSign nv-sa,C=BE | 19 Jun 2020 | 28 Jan 2028 | RSA 4096 | SHA256-RSA | 77bd0d6cdb36f91aea210fc4f058d30d |
Background: What to check on a remote MCP endpoint →
DNSSEC insecure
Validation of api.lmgram.com. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | trust_anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| com. | present | 19718 | 13 | Verified |
| lmgram.com. | absent | Unsigned (proven) parent-signed NSEC/NSEC3 proves an unsigned delegation |
Authentication Enforced and verified
The endpoint asked for a token and published valid RFC 9728 metadata describing how to get one.
| Result | Enforced and verified |
|---|---|
| Enforced | On tool calls |
| HTTP status | 200 |
WWW-Authenticate challenge Bearer resource_metadata="https://api.lmgram.com/.well-known/oauth-protected-resource"
Bearer resource_metadata="https://api.lmgram.com/.well-known/oauth-protected-resource"Protected resource metadata
| Document | https://api.lmgram.com/.well-known/oauth-protected-resource |
|---|---|
| Retrieved | Yes |
| Resource | https://api.lmgram.com/mcp |
| Authorisation server | https://api.lmgram.com |
Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →
Transports 2 probes
| Transport | URL | Outcome | Status | Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| streamable-http | https://api.lmgram.com/mcp | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://api.lmgram.com/mcp | HTTPS enforced | 301 | https://api.lmgram.com:443/mcp |
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 →
get_current_user Get current LMGram profile ~20
Returns the LMGram profile linked to the connected account.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
list_match_requests List LMGram match requests ~54
Lists recent match requests for the current LMGram user, optionally filtered by role and status.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | integer | – | – |
| role | string | – | – |
| status | string | – | Optional exact request status to return. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
list_messages List chat messages ~44
Lists messages in a LMGram chat. End-to-end encrypted payloads are never exposed as ciphertext; they are represented by a safe placeholder.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| chatId | string | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
request_human_match Request a human match ~204
Creates an opt-in LMGram human match request only after the user explicitly asks to use LMGram to find a collaborator, peer, mentor, or helper. Never invoke for general advice, dating or romantic matchmaking. Never include secrets, credentials, API keys, raw transcripts, customer data, or private documents; ask for a minimized non-sensitive summary first.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| language | string | – | – |
| matchType | string | – | – |
| maxCandidates | integer | – | – |
| need | string | yes | The concrete collaborator, peer, mentor, or helper the user explicitly wants. Dating and romantic matching are not supported. |
| sensitivity | string | – | – |
| summary | string | yes | Minimized non-sensitive summary. Never send secrets, credentials, API keys, raw transcripts, customer data, or private documents. |
| topic | string | yes | Short, non-sensitive title for the practical or professional session topic. Dating and romantic requests are not supported. |
| urgency | number | – | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
send_message Send a chat message ~32
Sends a message into a LMGram chat.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| body | string | yes | – |
| chatId | string | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
start_chat Start or request a chat ~46
Starts a LMGram chat for a match request, or records that this side wants to chat.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| body | string | – | Optional first message. |
| matchRequestId | string | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
What is the LMGram MCP server?
LMGram is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.saezbaldo/lmgram. Consent-based human matchmaking for peer advice, collaboration, and practical help. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://api.lmgram.com/mcp).
Is the LMGram MCP server safe to use?
LMGram scores 88 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 LMGram MCP server expose?
LMGram exposes 6 tools: get_current_user, request_human_match, list_match_requests, start_chat, list_messages, send_message. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 400 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the LMGram MCP server require authentication?
Yes. LMGram asked us for credentials when we connected, so you will need to authorise it in your MCP client before it can do anything.
Is the LMGram MCP server still maintained?
LMGram is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 21 September 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.