io.github.serg-tanichev/email-spam-tester
REMOTE · EMAIL-SPAM-TESTER.COM
Test an email before it goes out: a disposable address, 41 checks with RFC citations, a fix plan.
Available components
Last scanned (18 hours ago)
Scores higher than 94% of remote servers
Reachable. Last reached 4 Nov 2026.
Category Marketing and SEO
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 Security77
- 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
- HSTS check failed: the Strict-Transport-Security header is absent. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
- DNSSEC is configured correctly; the domain's records validate against the full chain to the root. View diagnostics → Pass
Transport & Reachability100
- Verified streamable-http transport via a live MCP handshake. View diagnostics → Pass
Schema Quality & AI Usability79
- 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
- Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 792 tokens (~158/item across 5 items; 4 tools + 1 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 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 (100% 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
- We read all 4 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 6 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
- Supports UI / widget rendering.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
- 17 Oct 26 0
- Stability: 0.97 → pass security
- 16 Oct 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.
- 14 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 87 to 90. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 26 days of observed history at the previous scan, 27 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 13 Oct 26 0
- The server rewrote its instructions, which are the text every model session reads security
- Tool “get_message_source” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- Tool “get_report” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- “get_message_source” reworded the description of “slug” cosmetic
- “get_report” reworded the description of “slug” cosmetic
- 12 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 77 to 83. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 23 days of observed history at the previous scan, 25 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 10 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 70 to 77. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 21 days of observed history at the previous scan, 23 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 8 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 63 to 70. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 19 days of observed history at the previous scan, 21 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://email-spam-tester.com/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=email-spam-tester.com | CN=YE2,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US | 24 Sept 2026 | 23 Dec 2026 | ECDSA 256 | ECDSA-SHA384 | 60cbc5e3a2d0434a97a6a5ba23bd3bbc8b3 |
| SANs: *.email-spam-tester.com, email-spam-tester.com | ||||||
| CN=YE2,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US (CA) | CN=Root YE,O=ISRG,C=US | 3 Sept 2025 | 2 Sept 2028 | ECDSA 384 | ECDSA-SHA384 | 4df3b15dd6c0784c507cd37b58e6f115 |
| CN=Root YE,O=ISRG,C=US (CA) | CN=ISRG Root X2,O=Internet Security Research Group,C=US | 13 May 2026 | 2 Sept 2032 | ECDSA 384 | ECDSA-SHA384 | 872165fc34b6e5fba8add5b3705fb53a |
| CN=ISRG Root X2,O=Internet Security Research Group,C=US (CA) | CN=ISRG Root X1,O=Internet Security Research Group,C=US | 13 May 2026 | 2 Sept 2032 | ECDSA 384 | SHA256-RSA | 6c8f1dc727c7117f7baf853ac980f9cd |
Background: What to check on a remote MCP endpoint →
DNSSEC secure
Validation of email-spam-tester.com. — Secure
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | trust_anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| com. | present | 19718 | 13 | Verified |
| email-spam-tester.com. | present | 2371 | 13 | Verified |
| email-spam-tester.com. | Verified address RRset verified with the apex keys |
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://email-spam-tester.com/mcp | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://email-spam-tester.com/mcp | HTTPS enforced | 301 | https://email-spam-tester.com/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_message_source Read the received message ~107
The message exactly as it was received: headers, both bodies, source. Useful when a finding points at a header and the agent needs to see what it actually sent rather than what it believes it sent. The message is kept for an hour after it arrives and then deleted; within that hour anyone with the slug can read it. After that only the report remains.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | string | yes | The slug of a test whose message has already arrived. |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | string | yes | – |
No examples provided.
get_report Read a report ~85
Read a report by its slug without waiting, with provider placement so far. The report stays at its link for good and anyone with the link can read it: the checks, the score, the fix plan, and the subject and sender of the email.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | string | yes | The slug of a test, the last part of the report URL. |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| view | string | yes | Which card to draw. |
No examples provided.
get_test_address Get a test address ~342
Reserve a single-use address to send a draft email to, for a full check. Returns the address and the URL its report will appear at. The address accepts exactly one message and expires after an hour. The email has to be sent by the person, from the platform or mailbox they really send from: half the checks read what that platform adds. The report covers 42 checks (SPF, DKIM, DMARC, reverse DNS, TLS, blocklists, content, links, the Gmail and Yahoo bulk-sender rules) and a plan of what to fix. lang is decided now because the message arrives minutes later over SMTP, which carries no hint of who is waiting for it. What wait_for_report returns quotes check lines in English whatever it is set to; the person following report_url sees their own language.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| include_placement | boolean | – | Also check which folder (inbox, spam, promotions) the email lands in at different mailbox providers, from the same send. The email then goes to a list of recipients instead of one address and needs a… |
| lang | – | – | ISO code of the language the report and the fix plan are written in for the person who opens the report page, for example "en", "de" or "pt-BR". Defaults to the language of the conversation. Unknown… |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| view | string | yes | Which card to draw. |
No examples provided.
wait_for_report Wait for the report ~168
Wait until the message arrives and has been analysed, then summarise it. Call it after the email has been sent to the address from get_test_address. Blocks rather than returning "not ready yet": an agent told to poll writes a sleep loop and usually gives up before the analysis finishes. Provider placement keeps filling in for up to 30 minutes after the report; get_report reads the latest.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | string | yes | The slug get_test_address returned, the last part of the report URL. |
| timeout_seconds | integer | – | How long to block waiting for the message and its analysis, in seconds. The checks are ready in well under a minute; the fix plan takes about another one. Past this the tool returns what it has. |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| view | string | yes | Which card to draw. |
No examples provided.
How do I install the io.github.serg-tanichev/email-spam-tester MCP server?
io.github.serg-tanichev/email-spam-tester is a hosted endpoint at https://email-spam-tester.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 · email-spam-tester.com
claude mcp add --transport http serg-tanichev-email-spam-tester 'https://email-spam-tester.com/mcp'
What is the io.github.serg-tanichev/email-spam-tester MCP server?
io.github.serg-tanichev/email-spam-tester is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.serg-tanichev/email-spam-tester. Test an email before it goes out: a disposable address, 41 checks with RFC citations, a fix plan. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://email-spam-tester.com/mcp).
Is the io.github.serg-tanichev/email-spam-tester MCP server safe to use?
io.github.serg-tanichev/email-spam-tester 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 io.github.serg-tanichev/email-spam-tester MCP server expose?
io.github.serg-tanichev/email-spam-tester exposes 4 tools: get_test_address, wait_for_report, get_report, get_message_source. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 702 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the io.github.serg-tanichev/email-spam-tester MCP server require authentication?
No. We connected to io.github.serg-tanichev/email-spam-tester without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.
Is the io.github.serg-tanichev/email-spam-tester MCP server still maintained?
io.github.serg-tanichev/email-spam-tester 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.