io.github.theluckystrike/supplier-statement-check
MCPB · SUPPLIER-STATEMENT-CHECK.MCPB
Compare supplied supplier statement and AP open items locally, with complete discrepancy evidence.
Available components
Last scanned (22 hours ago)
Scores higher than 79% of MCPB 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 Security23
- No malware scan is available for this kind of package: the supply-chain vendors we use do not cover it. This is a permanent gap in our coverage, not a finding about the package.Unverified
- Known CVEs were checked across the 92 of 92 dependencies we could resolve, so this covers what we could see, not the whole tree.Partial
- No install/post-install scripts declared.Pass
- 30 of 92 dependencies flagged as unhealthy. View diagnostics → Partial
Provenance & Transparency45
- Source repository is publicly reachable at the declared URL. View diagnostics → Pass
- Provenance check failed: no build-provenance attestation is published. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
- Clear OSI-approved license (MIT).Pass
- Actively maintained (last published 9 days ago).Pass
- Disclosure check failed: no security disclosure policy was found in the source repository. See how to fix → Fail
Schema Quality & AI Usability66
- AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
- Tool/resource definitions use about 444 tokens (~55/item across 8 items; 8 tools + 0 resources), lean.Pass
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management33
- Stability observed for 10 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
Tool Coverage69
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 8% 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 8 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 SecurityNo malware scan is available for this kind of package: the supply-chain vendors we use do not cover it. This is a permanent gap in our coverage, not a finding about the 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.
- 4 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 27 to 30. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 8 days of observed history at the previous scan, 9 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 2 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 20 to 23. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 6 days of observed history at the previous scan, 7 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 31 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 13 to 17. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 4 days of observed history at the previous scan, 5 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 29 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 7 to 10. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 2 days of observed history at the previous scan, 3 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 27 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 0 to 3. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 0 days of observed history at the previous scan, 1 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 26 Oct 26 43
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 mcpb/https://github.com/theluckystrike/mcp-servers/releases/download/v0.25.0/supplier-statement-check.mcpb@0.25.0
Provenance No attestation
The registry publishes no build provenance for this version, so there is nothing to verify.
| Result | No attestation |
|---|---|
| Ecosystem | mcpb |
| Reason | No attestation published |
Background: How many MCP packages publish verified provenance →
Dependencies 92 packages
| Packages resolved | 92 |
|---|---|
| Stale | 30 |
| 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 →
license_activate Activate license ~71
Activate a Pro key (MCPL1.xxx.yyy) from checkout: verified offline against a built-in public key, saved to your config file. A wrong, malformed or expired key is refused, unsaved. license_status reads it back.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| key | string | yes | License key from the checkout confirmation page |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
license_status License status ~54
Report this server's licence state: product, tier free or pro, licence id, expiry, the key source and the upgrade URL. No arguments, no network. Explains a free-tier refusal; license_activate installs a key.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
report_delete Delete one saved open-item check ~33
Delete one local comparison report and free a saved-report slot. Does not alter accounting records.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | string | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
report_export_csv Export complete open-item evidence as CSV ~72
Export free CSV pages from a saved report or unsaved preview. One row per supplied source item, with side, group and issues. Formula-like cells are escaped; no amount-loss or balance total is calculated.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | string | yes | – |
| limit | integer | – | – |
| offset | integer | – | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
report_get Read a saved open-item check ~31
Read a saved comparison with complete source evidence. Large reports return free paging instructions.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | string | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
report_list List saved open-item checks ~46
List saved report ids, timestamps and review-group counts. Free on both tiers; up to 100 reports per page.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | integer | – | – |
| offset | integer | – | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
report_page Read complete open-item evidence pages ~77
Read free pages of either source list, group summaries or one group’s source members. Unsaved previews last 30 minutes for the last two checks in this process.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| group_id | string | – | – |
| id | string | yes | – |
| limit | integer | – | – |
| offset | integer | – | – |
| section | string | yes | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
supplier_statement_check Compare supplier statement and AP open items ~60
Compare two supplied open-item lists of up to 1000 records each by exact entity, supplier, currency, document type and reference. Flag missing-side items, amount/date discrepancies and ambiguous repeated references. All evidence is free; no balance or payment approval.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the io.github.theluckystrike/supplier-statement-check MCP server?
io.github.theluckystrike/supplier-statement-check ships as an MCPB bundle, a single file you download and open in an MCP host that supports MCPB bundles, such as Claude Desktop. The host reads the launch command from the bundle's own manifest, so there is no command to copy. Before opening it, check the file's SHA-256 matches the one the MCP registry declares for it, 98784c618a5f7df7c0e3ea4d4528200c10ea43d65eff785fbc1cde55216b306b; the commands to do that are on this page. If it does not match, do not open it.
mcpb · supplier-statement-check.mcpb
Download bundleCheck the download matches the SHA-256 the MCP registry declares before you open it. If it does not match, do not open the file.
SHA-256
98784c618a5f7df7c0e3ea4d4528200c10ea43d65eff785fbc1cde55216b306b
macOS / Linux
echo "98784c618a5f7df7c0e3ea4d4528200c10ea43d65eff785fbc1cde55216b306b supplier-statement-check.mcpb" | shasum -a 256 -c
Windows (PowerShell)
(Get-FileHash -Algorithm SHA256 .\supplier-statement-check.mcpb).Hash -eq "98784c618a5f7df7c0e3ea4d4528200c10ea43d65eff785fbc1cde55216b306b"
Run it in the folder you saved the bundle to, then open the file with an MCPB-capable host such as Claude Desktop.
What is the io.github.theluckystrike/supplier-statement-check MCP server?
io.github.theluckystrike/supplier-statement-check is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.theluckystrike/supplier-statement-check. Compare supplied supplier statement and AP open items locally, with complete discrepancy evidence. This page covers its MCPB bundle (https://github.com/theluckystrike/mcp-servers/releases/download/v0.25.0/supplier-statement-check.mcpb).
Is the io.github.theluckystrike/supplier-statement-check MCP server safe to use?
io.github.theluckystrike/supplier-statement-check scores 48 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. It declares no install or post-install scripts. 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.theluckystrike/supplier-statement-check MCP server expose?
io.github.theluckystrike/supplier-statement-check exposes 8 tools: supplier_statement_check, report_list, report_get, report_page, report_delete, and 3 more. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 444 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
What licence is the io.github.theluckystrike/supplier-statement-check MCP server under?
io.github.theluckystrike/supplier-statement-check 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 io.github.theluckystrike/supplier-statement-check MCP server?
VerifyMCP ran 15 checks on io.github.theluckystrike/supplier-statement-check, 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 io.github.theluckystrike/supplier-statement-check: Malware scan. Endpoint Security and Transport & Reachability do not apply to an MCPB bundle, so they were not tested. The score does not measure everything, and the scoring documentation lists what it leaves out.