PayPerScreen
NPM · PAYPERSCREEN-MCP
Sanctions, crypto wallet, email and IP screening for agents. Pay per check in USDC via x402.
Available components
Last scanned (22 hours ago)
Scores higher than 35% of npm servers
Category Security
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 Security81
- No malware found by supply-chain analysis.Pass
- CVE check failed: a known high-severity CVE affects zod 3.25.76, a direct dependency. A fixed version is available. View diagnostics → Fail
- No install/post-install scripts declared.Pass
- 30 of 112 dependencies flagged as unhealthy. View diagnostics → Partial
Provenance & Transparency19
- Repository check failed: the declared repository URL returned HTTP 404. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
- 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 7 days ago).Pass
- Security-disclosure policy not yet verified: we couldn't inspect the source repository.Unverified
Schema Quality & AI Usability72
- AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
- Tool/resource definitions use about 689 tokens (~86/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 Management67
- Stability observed for 20 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 8 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 9 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
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.
- 3 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 60 to 63. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 18 days of observed history at the previous scan, 19 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 1 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 53 to 57. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 16 days of observed history at the previous scan, 17 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 29 Oct 26 +16
- Malware scan: unverified → pass ▲ security
- 28 Oct 26 −5
- Source repository: pass → fail ▼ security
- Security disclosure: fail → unverified ▼ functional
- Package version: 0.1.2 → 0.1.3 functional
- 27 Oct 26 −14
- Malware scan: pass → unverified ▼ security
- Package version: 0.1.1 → 0.1.2 functional
- 25 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 30 to 33. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 9 days of observed history at the previous scan, 10 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 24 Oct 26 −5
- CVE-2023-54404 affects this package: high ▼ security
- Known CVEs: pass → fail ▼ security
- 22 Oct 26 +3
- Stability: unverified → 0.23 ▲ 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 4 Nov 2026 · Analysed npm/payperscreen-mcp@0.1.3
Provenance No attestation
The registry publishes no build provenance for this version, so there is nothing to verify.
| Result | No attestation |
|---|---|
| Ecosystem | npm |
Background: How many MCP packages publish verified provenance →
Vulnerabilities 1 finding
| ID | CVE | Severity | Vector | Fix available |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GHSA-mrhx-c7xc-m3w5 | CVE-2023-54404 | high | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H | yes |
Background: What a vulnerability scan can and cannot prove →
Dependencies 112 packages
| Packages resolved | 112 |
|---|---|
| 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 →
check_email Email risk check ~72
Assess an email address for signup or payout fraud: nine deterministic signals (mail server, disposable domain, domain age, certificate history, typo-squats, role accounts, mailbox probe). Returns low, medium or high risk with each signal explained. Costs $0.02.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| string | yes | Email address |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
check_ip IP risk check ~78
Check a public IPv4 or IPv6 address: is it in an embargoed or heavily sanctioned country, a VPN, an anonymous proxy, a Tor exit node, a botnet control server, or on a cloud or hosting network? Returns country and network owner. Costs $0.02.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| ip | string | yes | Public IPv4 address |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
lists_coverage Lists and freshness (free) ~37
Free. Which sanctions and wallet lists PayPerScreen checks, how many records each has, its publication date and when it was last refreshed.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
sample_name_screen Sample name screening (free) ~35
Free. A real, live screen_name result for a fixed example (Vladimir Putin), to see the response format before paying.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
sample_wallet_screen Sample wallet screening (free) ~36
Free. A real, live screen_wallet result for a fixed OFAC-sanctioned wallet, to see the response format before paying.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
screen_name Sanctions screening (name) ~217
Screen a person or company against the OFAC SDN, UN Security Council, EU, UK, Canadian, Swiss and Australian sanctions lists and the US Consolidated Screening List (BIS Entity List, Denied Persons, State Department debarments, OFAC non-SDN lists; refreshed daily). Fuzzy match including aliases and word order. Each hit returns the listed name, score, record ID, sanctions programmes, aliases, and a comparison of the date of birth, nationality and type you pass against the listed record, which helps rule out namesakes. Pass dob and country whenever you know them. Costs $0.02.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| country | string | – | Nationality or country |
| dob | string | – | Date of birth, YYYY-MM-DD |
| limit | integer | – | Matches per list, default 1 |
| name | string | yes | Full name of the person or company |
| threshold | number | – | Minimum match score, default 0.4 |
| type | string | – | Individual (default) or Entity |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
screen_wallet Crypto wallet screening ~96
Check a crypto wallet address before sending or accepting funds: exact match against every OFAC-sanctioned address (a hit names the sanctioned party and SDN number), Tether's USDT freeze list on Tron, and wallets the FBI and victims tied to major hacks. Each source is reported separately. Costs $0.02.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| address | string | yes | Wallet address (Bitcoin, Ethereum/EVM, Tron, Solana and more) |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
spending_status Spending this session (free) ~26
Free. How much this session has spent, the cap, the paying wallet and network.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the PayPerScreen MCP server?
PayPerScreen runs locally as an npm package, launched with npx -y payperscreen-mcp. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.
npm · payperscreen-mcp
claude mcp add tonythetiger22-payperscreen -- npx -y payperscreen-mcp
What is the PayPerScreen MCP server?
PayPerScreen is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.TonytheTiger22/payperscreen. Sanctions, crypto wallet, email and IP screening for agents. Pay per check in USDC via x402. This page covers its npm package (payperscreen-mcp).
Is the PayPerScreen MCP server safe to use?
PayPerScreen scores 68 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. We recorded 1 known advisory against it as of 4 November 2026. 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 PayPerScreen MCP server expose?
PayPerScreen exposes 8 tools: screen_name, screen_wallet, check_email, check_ip, lists_coverage, and 3 more. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 597 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Is the PayPerScreen MCP server still maintained?
PayPerScreen 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.
What licence is the PayPerScreen MCP server under?
PayPerScreen declares the MIT licence, which is OSI-approved. That covers the source only, and says nothing about the cost of any service it calls.